Miranda v. Arizona Tom Johnson & Jessica Gerharter Miranda v. Arizona • The plaintiff in the case of Miranda v. Arizona was Ernesto Miranda, who had not been told he had the right to remain silent and had no access to a lawyer when he was arrested for robbery but later confessed to kidnapping and sexual assault. Miranda, unaware of his rights, confessed to those crimes. Miranda v. Arizona • Miranda had several constitution rights that were violated. • 5th Amendment- self incrimination clause • 6th Amendment- right to an attorney Verdict • Miranda’s case went to the supreme court in 1966, where the court ruled that Miranda’s confession could not be used as evidence. Miranda was still prosecuted with other witnesses and evidence. Miranda was found guilty and sentenced to 20-30 years in jail. Ernesto Miranda Miranda was paroled in 1972, where he then made a living autographing police officer’s Miranda Cards. Miranda was killed in a bar fight in 1976. Impacts • Following the Miranda court case, nations police officers are required to read the arrested their rights. • “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in the court of law. You have the right to an attorney, and to have an attorney present during any questioning. If you can not afford a lawyer, one will be provided for you at government expense.” Subsequent Cases • Colorado v. Connelly • Under the Miranda rights, a suspect, must be knowing, intelligent and voluntary when hearing accepting his Miranda rights. The supreme court overruled that clause, stating that is is irrelevant to whether or not the suspect is insane at the time. Questions Sources • • Mount, Steve. "The Miranda Warning". <Http://www.usconstitution.net/miranda.html >. Picture, of Miranda. "Ernesto Miranda". <http://www.dominickrusso.com/images/ernesto_miranda.jpg >.