what was the supreme court desicion for Miranda V. Arizona?/?? AND What was the reason for this desicion???

Question

what was the supreme court desicion for Miranda V. Arizona?/?? AND What was the reason for this desicion???

i need like an explanation alll the websites i went to are not really helping me!!!!!!!!!

Answer 1

Miranda vs Arizona cite as: 384 US 436 (1966) was an important decision in the development of the American criminal defense process.

Enersto Miranda was arrested on multiple criminal charges. He was interrogated by police officers without any advice that he had the right to have an attorney present, that if he couldn't afford an attorney one would be appointed for him, and that he did not have to answer the police's questions. He eventually, after a lengthy interrogation, confessed. The confession was the sole evidence against him at his trial, and he was convicted.

The Court held, following its ruling in Escombedo v. Illinois, 378 US 478 (1964) and held that the practices of police in questioning a suspect were such that abuses occurred, and that unless warned of their constitutional rights, many people would make statements against their interest and therefore be derived of a fair trial.

The Court essentially found that the rights to counsel, to remain silent, and to have counsel appointed if one couldn't afford it were constitutional protections afforded to all individuals by virtue of the 14th Amendment, which extended federal due process requirements to the states.

If you haven't done so, I suggest you read the opinion in Miranda v. Arizona (citation, supra), and also in Esconbedo v. Illinois. If you have more questions after having read those cases, please email me and I will answer if I can.

Answer 2

Miranda Vs Arizona was a case in which called to attention to arrestee's right. Ernesto Miranda was arrested by
Ari peace officers {police officers). At the time , police could arrest people without informing them of their rights. Miranda took his case through the court system, saying he wasn't informed of his rights like having the right to remain silent, having a laywer present at the time of questioning, etc. The case reached the Supreme court and the justices ruled that those being arrested have a right to know why they're being arrested. The Miranda decision became a constitutional amendment that goes along the lines of due process. Due Process means basically people have the right to know what they're being arrested for,
face their accuser(s), have the right to a speedy trial by a jury of their peers etc.

Answer 3

I am a political science major and study a bunch of court cases. The best website to find brief discriptions of the decisions is at www.oyez.org....Arizona actually had to let Miranda go...and this is what established the Miranada rights to prevent abuses among law inforcement. The main idea is to prevent abuses in obtaining confessions. The website does not throw in a bunch of legal jargon the average person does not understand...for the most part.

Answer 4

You've never heard of wikipedia?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_V_Arizona