Miranda v. Arizona
What is Miranda v. Arizona (1966)?
Miranda v. Arizona was a court case that took place in the State of Arizona in which Ernesto Miranda, a 22 year old male, was accused of raping an 18 year old female in 1963. Upon his apprehension, Miranda was presented with a confession requiring his signature; Miranda underwent a police interrogation that was reported as spanning upwards of 2 hours – within his interrogation, he made a full confession, agreeing that he did so without duress, force, or threat. However, Miranda’s attorneys argued that not only did the arresting officers not make Miranda aware of his right to representation, but they also neglected to advise Miranda of his right to remain silent in order to avoid any nature of self-incrimination:
Subsequent to the initial verdict, Miranda was found guilty of the charge of rape; however, he appealed the verdict and Miranda v. Arizona was heard before the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court hearing undertook judicial review with regard to the validity of a confession with regard to the level of information provided to the suspect in question
The 5th Amendment of the constitution requires a suspect be informed of a right to remain silent upon an arrest; The 6th Amendment requires a suspect under arrest to be informed to their right to a fair and represented hearing
The Case Profile of Miranda v. Arizona
The following is a case profile of the legal trial eponymously titled ‘Miranda v. Arizona’:
Date of the Trial: 1966
Legal Classification: Administrative Law; this legal field associated with events and circumstances in which the Federal Government of the United States engages its citizens, including the administration of government programs, the creation of agencies, and the establishment of a legal, regulatory federal standard
Accused Criminal Activity: Although Miranda was accused of rape, the appeal addressed the lack of due process within Miranda’s arrest
United States Reports Case Number: 384 U.S. 436
Date of the Delivery of the Verdict: June 13th, 1966
Legal Venue: The Supreme Court of State of Arizona
Judicial Officer Responsible for Ruling: Chief Justice Earl Warren
Verdict Delivered: Warren found that both Miranda’s 5th and 6th Amendment rights had been violated; however, supplementary evidence contributed to the finding of a ‘guilty’ verdict with regard to the rape trial – Miranda served 11 years in prison
Associated Legislation with regard to Miranda v. Arizona: The Miranda Rights were established subsequent to the hearing of Miranda v. Arizona; these statutes state that upon an arrest protocol that be upheld by any and all arresting officers:
The Miranda Rights include the Fifth Amendment, which states that an individual retains the right to remain silent in order to avoid incriminating themselves – this is also known as ‘pleading the Fifth’
The Miranda Rights require that arrestees are made aware of their respective right to counsel and trial
The right for any words spoken during the arrest to be admissible during a trial
The right to consult with an attorney; regardless of financial stature
