Miranda V Arizona

1647 Words7 Pages
Miranda v. Arizona (1966) Facts of the Case Began in 1963 when Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Phoenix, Arizona and taken to into custody. A crime victim identified him in a police lineup at the Maricopa County Jail. He was charged with rape and robbery. Two officers take Miranda to Interrogation Room No. 2. 2 hours later they returned with a written and signed confession from Miranda. Background: Miranda was a poor Mexican immigrant, who had not finished ninth grade and had a history of mental instability. The interrogating officers did not read Miranda his rights – 5th Amendment Constitutional right against self-incrimination and 6th Amendment the right to assistance of counsel. After taken to trial, the prosecutor's case “consisted solely of his confession” to obtain a conviction. The Maricopa County Superior Court convicted Miranda of both rape and kidnapping and was then sentenced to 20 to 30 years in prison. Miranda appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court, claiming that “the police had unconstitutionally obtained his confession” as well as the absence of an attorney during the interrogation and should have been excluded from trial. The police officers involved admitted that they had not given Miranda any explanation of his rights. They argued, however, that because Miranda had been convicted of a crime in the past, he must have been aware of his rights. The Arizona Supreme Court denied his appeal and upheld his conviction. Miranda then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which reviewed his case in 1966 (Miranda v. Arizona). Decision The Warren Court argued February 28 – March 2, 1966 Did not decide until June 13, 1966 There were 5 votes for Miranda and 4 votes against Chief Justice Warren, ruled that the prosecution could not introduce Miranda's confession as evidence in a criminal trial because “the police had failed to first inform

More about Miranda V Arizona

Open Document