Miranda+vs.+Arizona


 * Name: Marissa McConnell**
 * Date: November 9, 2011**

In this case Ernesto Miranda, a 23 year old man was arrested in his house for kidnapping and sexual assault, taken to the police station, identified by the victim, and taken into the interrogation room. He was not told his rights to counsel prior to questioning. He signed a written confession saying that he knew his legal rights, understanding any statement I make may be used against me. Two weeks later at a hearing, he was denied counsel. At his trial he had a lawyer, whose objections to the use of the written confession as evidence were overruled. He was convicted of kidnapping and rape. He received a 20 year sentence. The decision of the court is that the court voted to overturn Miranda’s conviction. Chief Justice Warren decided that the “procedural safeguards effective to secure the privilege against self-incrimination” are followed. “The current practice of unable to communicate with the world, interrogation is at odds with one of our nation’s most cherished principles.” Warren the summarized the case, stating that it’s against the “fundamental fairness” standards the court has established, Miranda was not in any way appraised of his right to consult with an attorney, nor to have any protection in any other manner. Without these warnings his statement was inadmissible.
 * Court Case: **
 * //What amendment did this case deal with and what does it say?//** The amendment this deals with is the 5th and 6th amendment. The 5th amendment deals with protecting your rights of the accused. The 6th amendment deals with a speedy trial.
 * //What is the background of the case? Summarize what happened!//**
 * //What was the final decision of the Supreme Court and why did they decide this?//**


 * Name: Gabby CIna**
 * Date: November 10,2011**


 * //What amendment did this case deal with and what does it say?//**


 * //The Amendment this case deals with is the Fifth Amendment. The Fifth Amendment is about being able to remain silent because you have your rights to. This Amendment guarantees Americans the right to trial by Grand jury for certain crimes. They also have the right to be paid for compensation for property by the government for public use. Also known as Eminent Domain.//**


 * //What is the background of the case? Summarize what happened!//**


 * //If you ever wondered where the Miranda warning came from, it came from this case. This is how it all started when there was a kidnapping and a sexual assault in Phoenix Arizona on March 1963. Ernesto Miranda who was a 23 year old was arrested for these charges. But the cops did something very wrong when they arrested Ernesto. They forgot to give him his rights.//**
 * //But the cops gave Ernesto a paper to sign. The paper they gave him to sign was a confession. And by Ernesto signing it he said he knew his rights and Ernesto was convicted of kidnapping and rape. So Ernesto Miranda was sent to jail for 20 years.//**


 * //What was the final decision of the Supreme Court and why did they decide this?//**


 * //Ernesto was found not guilty winning from a 5-4 margin. Warren the judge of this case explained that the police should have given Ernesto his rights. And what they should have said to him was, he has the right to remain silent, that anything he says can be used against him in the court of law and he has the right to call his attorney but if he does not have one and can’t afford one there will be one given to him. Then Ernesto Miranda tried to retract his confession and the state of Arizona tried him again but he was still found guilty and sent to jail again. Ernesto Miranda’s retrial did not make “double jeopardy”.//**


 * Name:** Samantha Irwin
 * Date:** November 4, 2011


 * Court Case: ** Miranda vs. Arizona

This court case deals with the Fifth and Sixth Amendments. The Fifth Amendment is basically the Miranda Warning. Any person who is interrogated may ‘plead the 5th’. **“** ** No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” ** This court case actually helped with the creation of the Miranda Warning. Without this case, the Miranda Warning might not exist in today’s society. The Sixth Amendment involves the trials themselves. **“** ** In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.” ** Ernesto Miranda committed a kidnapping and sexual assault in March of 1963. Miranda, 23; was arrested in his own home, taken to a nearby police station and identified by the victim, and was finally taken into an interrogation room to be questioned. He was not told of his rights to remain silent or to counsel prior the questioning session. Later on, he appealed due to this fact. Thus, they created the Miranda warning.
 * What amendment did this case deal with and what does it say? **
 * What is the background of the case? Summarize what happened! **

The Supreme Court decided to create the Miranda Warning. They decided this so that the accused would know their rights beforehand. Before they let Miranda go on the account of the kidnapping and sexual assault that he had performed, they tried him again in another case. He was found guilty, and sent to jail.
 * What was the final decision of the Supreme Court and why did they decide this? **
 * Lewis Sparks**


 * November 8, 2011**


 * Court Case: **


 * // What amendment did this case deal with and what does it say? //**

In the court case Miranda v. Arizona it deals with the Fifth Amendment which states he had a right to a lawyer and to not incriminate himself. The fifth amendment is involved because a guy named Ernesto Miranda got arrested for kidnapping and raping a young women but that’s not all he has also has other criminal charges such as armed robbery, attempted rape, assault, and burglary. Miranda went to court and was found guilty because he appealed that he didn’t know what his Fifth Amendment rights.


 * // What is the background of the case? Summarize what happened! //**

Miranda got in trouble for kidnapping a young women and raping her but he got away with it because he claimed that he didn’t know what his Fifth Amendment rights were. Sadly he did end up getting with it. Ever since this court case the cops tell you the Fifth Amendment rights.


 * // What was the final decision of the Supreme Court and why did they decide this? //**

The final decision that the Supreme Court made was to let Ernesto Miranda go but now the police are made to read you your rights before they start ask questions about your case. Ever since Ernesto Miranda’s court case the Fifth Amendment has been called the Miranda warning. They did bring up another court case on Miranda and they did find him guilty so he did end up going to jail anyways.