Miranda v. Arizona Ernest Miranda was a resident of Phoenix Arizona. When a young woman Patty McGee was kidnapped and raped, the police considered Miranda to be a possible subject due his criminal history. The police went to Miranda's home asked Miranda to accompany them downtown for questioning about the rape and robbery of Patty McGee. Miranda did not know what was going on. He didn't know whether he had the choice of going with them. He was unaware of his status with the authorities and when he asked them what the questioning was about they said they couldn't tell him anything.
When he arrived at the station they put him in a line up with three other men. Patty was unsure of which man had raped her. The police deceitfully told Miranda that Patty knew he was the man. They questioned him and soon coerced a confession from him.
Miranda
English: Border Patrol agent reads the Miranda rig...
Justice Brennan's comments on the Miranda decision...After he admitted he was guilty of kidnap and rape, he was sentenced to 20 to 30 years in prison by the Arizona state court. This decision was appealed and taken all the way to the Supreme Court based on the fact that Miranda's fifth and sixth amendment rights were violated. He was not advised of his right to remain silent and that he could have an attorney present when being questioned. He was not aware of is Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself.
In the supreme court case Miranda v. Arizona, it was argued that a man like Miranda, who wasn't rich, who was emotionally disturbed, who had a limited education, shouldn't be expected to know his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself, and 2 he should have been informed of his right to have an attorney present when being questioned. The police took advantage of Miranda's lack of knowledge and it lead to his conviction. In the Supreme Court case Miranda v. Arizona, the Attorneys for Miranda were not trying to prove he was an innocent man, they wanted to concentrate on constitutional questions that the high court would be asked to resolve. They argued that Miranda showed have been informed his constitutional rights. The attorneys for Arizona believed that forcing police to inform suspects of their rights, would threaten public safety.
The decision came in and it was for Miranda. The Supreme Court held that the police are responsible for advising suspects of their constitutional rights. From now on police officers have started informing suspects of their "Miranda rights", that is, they have the right to remain silent, anything they say can and will be used against them, that they have the right to an attorney and if they cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided free of charge. This court decision changed the history of how suspects are handled and it brought up the importance and value of Constitutional Rights.
In the United States, a person who is going to be ...
Miranda