Miranda vs. Arizona

396 Words1 Page

Miranda vs. Arizona Miranda vs. Arizona was a case that considered the rights of the defendants in criminal cases in regards to the power of the government. Individual rights did not change with the Miranda decision, however it created new constitutional guidelines for law enforcement, attorneys, and the courts. The guidelines ensure that the individual rights of the fifth, sixth and the fourteenth amendment are protected. This decision requires that unless a suspect in custody has been informed of his constitutional rights before questioning anything he says may not be introduced in a court of law. The decision requires law enforcement officers to follow a code of conduct when arresting suspects. After an arrest is made, before they may begin questioning they must first advise the suspect of their rights, and make sure that the suspect understands them. These rights are known as the Miranda Warnings and include: 1. You have the right to remain silent and refuse to answer questions. 2. Anything you say may be used against you in a court of law. 3. You have the right to consult an attorney before speaking to the police and to have an attorney present during any questioning now or in the future. 4. If you do not have an attorney available, you have the right to remain silent until you have had an opportunity to consult with one. 5. If you cannot afford an attorney, you have the right to have one appointed for you. If the suspect refuses his right to an attorney, they may begin questioning him. If he/she decides invoke their right to remain silent, the police may not question the suspect, however they may at a later time attempt to question him again. If the suspect requests an attorney, questioning may not begin until the attorney had arrived and the suspect has had an opportunity to consult with him. If a suspect cannot afford an attorney the courts must appoint one for them, if they face a possibility of imprisonment. Until an attorney is assigned to their case and they have had an opportunity to consult with him, the police may not begin any questioning. If a police officer fails to advise a suspect of their rights, they may still arrest the individual.

Show More
Related

  • Miranda V. Arizona Case: Ernesto Miranda's Law

    1148 Words  | 3 Pages

    Some people might even argue that the Miranda’s laws might actually be harmful to law enforcement. Because the Miranda rules specify that a suspect must be read their Miranda Rights and has a right to waive those rights. If the suspect declines, the police are required by law to stop all questioning. Even if a suspect initially waives his rights, during an interrogation he can halt the process at any time by asking for a lawyer or taking back the waiver. The police, from that moment on, are not allowed to suggest that he or she reconsider (ncpa.org). Because of this, many people feel that this has had a harmful affect on law enforcement. Police have found that is much more difficult to get a confession. According to the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA), the fraction of suspects questioned who confessed dropped from 49% to 14% in New York and from 48% to 29% in Pittsburg. With fewer confessions, police also found that it is much more difficult to solve crimes. For example, following the Court decision, the rates of violent crime cases solved fell drastically from 60% (or higher) to approximately 45%. This level has remained constant over the years. Also, due to fewer confessions and fewer crimes that are solved, this means there are fewer convictions. According to the NCPA, there are 3.85 fewer convictions every year because of Miranda. Defenders of the Miranda decision say that fewer crimes solved are for a good reason. They believe that law enforcement officers were forced to stop coercive questioning techniques that are unconstitutional. Over the years, the Supreme Court has watered down its stance in saying that the Miranda rules are not constitutional obligations, but rather “prophylactic” safeguards which are intended to insure that officers do not force a confession from a suspect. The need for both effective law enforcement as well as protection of society dictate the need

    Read More

  • Midterm Hypothetical: The 4th Amendment And 6th Amendment

    868 Words  | 2 Pages

    ...you think I need an attorney?” He also asked this question several times thorough the interrogation. In this situation the police officer should have allowed Mr. Wilson to get a attorney after saying “I think I need an attorney?” because this is going against his basic rights and violates the 6th Amendment.

    Read More

  • Miranda's Rights: The Ernesto Miranda Case

    1113 Words  | 3 Pages

    I was always taught that if I was ever arrested for something that I know I did not do or just arrested in general to keep my mouth closed until somebody is there that fully understands the law and all the possible outcomes. Majority of time, I try to talk myself out of small things but if I know things are much more serious, I wait until I can have somebody there to speak on my behalf. When talking about the Miranda v Arizona court case, it is kind of his fault for talking before he was represented by a lawyer. As a civilian, you should always want legal representation even if it is something small, let alone you should know the law for personal

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Miranda V. Arizona

    574 Words  | 2 Pages

    Miranda Rights became a United States Supreme Court decision in 1966 (Miranda v. Arizona), in which the high court made a decision in favor of and upheld that the Fifth Amendment rights of Miranda were violated. The Miranda ruling gives suspects the right to remain silent and not speak to any law enforcement as a means to prevent self incrimination, the right to have an attorney present during questioning, if an attorney is requested and the defendant can’t afford one, there are provisions in Miranda for an attorney to be appointed to defend the individual.

    Read More

  • Against Consent Searches

    1530 Words  | 4 Pages

    ...e police officers. Miranda established the precedent that a citizen has a right to be informed of his or her rights before the police attempt to violate them with the intent that the warnings erase the inherent coercion of the situation. The Court's violation of this precedent is especially puzzling due to this case's many similarities to Miranda.

    Read More

  • Miranda V. Arizona

    543 Words  | 2 Pages

    In 1966, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in the landmark case of Miranda v Arizona and declared that, whenever a person is arrested by the police should be informed prior to questioning the right under the Fifth Amendment (" the Fifth Amendment ") not to make statements that might incriminate himself.

    Read More

  • Miranda Rights Must be Read

    543 Words  | 2 Pages

    “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have a right to an attorney. If you can not afford an attorney one will be appointed to you” This may be differ from state to state as long as the concept is conveyed they was read their rights. Miranda Rights is mandatory across the United States due to the Miranda v. Arizona. In the following will explain what the 3 branches Judicial, Executive, and the Legislative have done to enforce this law or to change it, as well as the effect on the people.

    Read More

  • Restraint and Activism

    379 Words  | 1 Pages

    Miranda v. Arizona is a very important activist decision that required police to inform criminal suspects of their rights before they could be interrogated. These rights include: the right to remain silent, that anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law, you have a right to an attorney, if you cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed to you be the court. In this case the Fifth Amendment's right that a person may not be forced to incriminate one's self was interpreted in an activist way as meaning that one must be aware of this right before on is interrogated by the police. Prior to this ruling it was common practice to force and coerce confessions from criminal suspects who did not know they had the right not to incriminate themselves.

    Read More

  • Fifth Amendment Essay

    1021 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...ained in their questioning. Officers commonly have small cards with the Miranda warnings on them so they don’t forget or skip over a part of ones right, if this does occur evidence still cannot be properly obtained because the person was not fully warned of all their rights. Currently, the only unwarned questioning that can occur is if the officer believes the public is in some type of danger. For example, if police come across a man standing in a convenience store that fits the description of recent thefts in a nearby neighborhood and the man runs once police confront him and is later caught and searched, when upon the search they realize he has an empty shoulder holster. In this scenario the public is in potential danger, the police can ask him where the gun is hidden without reading the man his rights and it would not be violating his Fifth Amendment rights.

    Read More

  • Persuasive Essay On Miranda Rights

    514 Words  | 2 Pages

    When someone is taken into custody they are read certain rights. These rights are called the Miranda rights. These insure that everyone knows what rights they have upon being arrested. Once arrested the police officer must read the rights. Included in the right are the right to remain silent and the right to a lawyer. For people that cannot afford a lawyer the lawyer will be appointed. Before the rights were implemented people would think they had to tell the police everything they saw or did, also by police stating the rights the people know that they have the right to a lawyer.

    Read More

  • Argumentative Essay On Miranda Rights

    1001 Words  | 3 Pages

    Evidence can prove that Miranda Rights should be an important right for the citizens of the United States Of America but should not be a digression or inconsequential and that shows Equality,liberty and justice. If we didn't have miranda rights we would end in a deleterious situation which would end in disaster for example, the police requirement to remember few amendment portrayed to Miranda Rights to recommend citizens that are inculpable to go to jail by police who can fabricate the situation.Evils don't have rights for other citizens like Paris which some of the victims have to be interrogated for a few days. “The Miranda warning prevents police from taking advantage of suspects who have been arrested or are in police custody. The Miranda Court determined that these protections were necessary to

    Read More

  • The Importance Of Public Safety Exception To Miranda

    411 Words  | 1 Pages

    In this paper I will discuss the public safety exception to Miranda. Does Miranda have to be given before any questioning can occur? Will the courts throw out any statement made when the suspect in in custody and being interrogated by the Government? This is a good question and hopefully I can answer this question in the following text.

    Read More

  • Supreme Court Argumentative Essay

    777 Words  | 2 Pages

    Arizona, the Supreme Court ruled that imprisoned accused, prior to police questioning, must be well-versed of their constitutional right to their Miranda rights. "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can, and will, is used against you in court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford one, one will be appointed to you”.

    Read More

  • Persuasive Essay On Miranda Rights

    499 Words  | 1 Pages

    By wavering his or her rights allows more chances to implicate their involvement in criminal activities and behavior. When law enforcement asks questions regarding a suspect’s name, address, date of birth and even profession it is not considered an interrogation but questioning “basic” identifying facts. If a suspect exercises a right to remain silent, being questioned about basic identifying facts is not considered incriminating. Other exceptions to Miranda rule is an incarcerated informant, who is aiding law enforcement in hopes of milking a confession from a suspect which can be used later legally. Securing public safety, more recently involving the Patriot Act, suspected terrorists and threatening attacking activities offer reasons for exceptions to Miranda rights.

    Read More

  • Police Procedures Essay

    1615 Words  | 4 Pages

    3. You might be asked to take part in a lineup, to do a sample of your handwriting, or to say words connected with the criminal offense that you are charged with, to wear specific clothing or to provide a hair sample. It is best to have your lawyer present in these kinds of processes. You do have a right to a lawyer in case you are asked to take part in a lineup once you have been charged formally by the prosecuting

    Read More

More about Miranda vs. Arizona

Open Document