What are Miranda rights?

Question

What are Miranda rights?

Thanks in advance..

Answer 1

They are the rights you have when you are arrested.

You have the right to remain silent.
Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law.
You have the right to an attorney.
If you cannot afford one, one will be appointed to you.

A man by the last name of Miranda was arrested and confessed to kidnapping and rape. No one told him that it was his constitutional right to have an attorney present at the investigation.

Now anytime a police officer places a person in custody, they must be read their rights before interrogation.

Answer 2

Okay,
Because people always screw this up and it bothers me that they do I'll answer this one.
The Miranda Rights are just like you see on Law and Order. You have the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney.

Here's where they get screwed up. They apply to you only when:
1) You are in custody (i.e. under arrest) AND,
2) Being questioned for the crime.

If neither of those two are present then you do not get the benefit of your Miranda Rights.

So if you are arrested by an officer. And the officer never questions you then the officer does not and should not read you your Miranda. Likewise if you are hanging out on the street and an officer walks up to you and asks you a question and there is no indication that you are in custody then you have no right to an attorney and can tell the officer you want to remain silent but the officer does not have to honor those requests (i.e. they can continue to talk to you). Of course if you are not under arrest or being detained then you can simply walk off.

It is very possible to talk to people without Miranda and use what they say against them in court. But I have already answered this question and don't feel like muddying the waters.

Answer 3

GIDEON V. WAINWRIGHT (1963)
MIRANDA V. ARIZONA (1966)

Two Supreme Court decisions in the 1960s supported the rights of persons accused of committing crimes.

Clarence Earl Gideon was arrested for breaking into a poolroom in Florida in 1961. When he requested a court-appointed lawyer to defend him, the judge denied his plea, saying that state law required appointment of a lawyer only in capital cases—cases involving a person's death or calling for the death penalty. Gideon defended himself and was found guilty. While in prison, he spent hours in the library studying law books and handwriting a petition to the Supreme Court to hear his case. The Court decided that Gideon was denied a fair trial and ruled that every state must provide counsel for people accused of crimes who cannot afford to hire their own. When Gideon was retried with the help of a defense attorney, he was acquitted.

Just three years later the Supreme Court decided that the accused should have the right to counsel long before they get to a courtroom. Ernesto Miranda was convicted in a state court in Arizona of kidnapping and rape. His conviction was based on a confession Miranda gave to police officers after two hours of questioning, without being advised that he had the right to have an attorney present. In its ruling the Supreme Court required that police officers, when making arrests, must give what are now known as Miranda warnings—that suspects have the right to remain silent, that anything they say may be used against them, that they can have a lawyer present during questioning, and that a lawyer will be provided if they cannot afford one.

Miranda v. Arizona is one of the Supreme Court's best known decisions, as Miranda warnings are dramatized routinely in American movies and television programs. However, in 1999 a federal court of appeals challenged the decision in the case of Dickerson v. United States, in which a convicted bank robber claimed he had not been properly read his rights. In June 2000, the Supreme Court overturned Dickerson in a 7-to-2 ruling that strongly reaffirmed the validity of Miranda.

Answer 4

The right to remain silent when interrogated in police custody.
The right to have an attorney represent you before & during police questioning even if you cannot afford an attorney.

Try this site for a pretty good analysis: http://www.landmarkcases.org/miranda/home.html

Scott L - Finally someone else who actually understands Miranda! I short cutted the explanation by referring to the above site.

Answer 5

as long as the officer has AT LEAST reasonable suspicion (because probable cause is stronger than reasonable suspicion) that the suspect commited the crime the officer does not have to reply to the suspect as to what he is being arrested for. but as soon as the moment the officer is putting on the cuffs he MUST read the suspect the Miranda rights. If the officer does not read the rights to the suspect then whatever the suspect says during interrogation will NOT be used in court and will be thrown out. but NEVER does the person have a right to resist arrest or the officer will slap even more charges on the suspect.

Answer 6

that thing that you always hear in movies when the cops arrest someone "you have the right to remain silent ..." and so on.

they have to read you your rights before they arrest you. if they don't read your rights they can't use what you say as evidence.
it's called Miranda after a case when a person was arrested and his testimony was used as an evidence, but the police didn't read his rights. the Supreme Court decided (based on the 5th Amend.) that the evidence couldn't be used so he walked

Answer 7

You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say may be used against you in a court of law.

You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you.

Do you understand your rights as I have explained them to you?

Answer 8

Apparently you don't watch any police shows on TV. Suspects are read their rights as well as anyone who is arrested. I won't repeat them because someone above me gave them perfectly.

Answer 9

They are read to you before you are placed under arrest.

Answer 10

no idea.... sry