1 / 6

Miranda v. Arizona 1966

Miranda v. Arizona 1966. Background Information. - Phoenix, Arizona 1966 Ernesto Miranda arrested for kidnapping and rape Interrogated for 2 hrs and signed confession Sentenced to 20-30 years in prison * Appealed case to the Supreme Court. Story Details.

dolph
Télécharger la présentation

Miranda v. Arizona 1966

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Miranda v. Arizona1966

  2. Background Information - Phoenix, Arizona 1966 • Ernesto Miranda arrested for kidnapping and rape • Interrogated for 2 hrs and signed confession • Sentenced to 20-30 years in prison * Appealed case to the Supreme Court

  3. Story Details - In the early hours of March 3, 1963, an 18-year-old Phoenix, Arizona, movie theater attendant was accosted by a stranger while on her way home from work. He dragged her into his car, drove out to the desert, and raped her. Afterwards he dropped the girl off near her home. The story she told police, often vague and contradictory, described her attacker as a bespectacled Mexican, late 20s, who was driving an early fifties car, either a Ford or Chevrolet. • By chance, one week later, the girl and her brother-in-law saw what she believed was the car, a 1953 Packard, license plate DFL-312. Records showed that this plate was actually registered to a late model Oldsmobile, but DFL-317 was a Packard, registered to a Twila N. Hoffman; and her boyfriend, Ernesto Miranda, 23, fit the attacker's description almost exactly. http://law.jrank.org/pages/3105/Ernesto-Miranda-Trials-1963-1967.html

  4. Amendment Challenged 5th Amendment – protection from self incrimination * What is an appropriate level of interrogation when investigating a crime and witness? * What is the proper procedure that must be taken when performing an interrogation?

  5. Ruling 5 to 4 Supreme Court decision! * What happens to a person when they are taken into custody? • Miranda was NOT “warned” or read his rights before he was interrogated by the police - Case was overturned in Miranda’s favor! No statement from a suspect may be used unless interrogation demonstrates the use of proper procedures to protect against self incrimination The confession was thrown out and his case was heard without confession although he was still found guilty

  6. Significance * “Miranda Rights” = regular practice of police arrests It cannot be assumed that a person is aware of what their rights are when they are arrested of a crime Miranda’s case violated… * DUE PROCESS OF LAW!!

More Related