by Marcos Cardona-7th period Miranda V. Arizona (1966) by Marcos Cardona-7th period

Plaintiff Side Ernesto Miranda was a Mexican immigrant that lived in Arizona and was convicted on kidnapping and raping an 17 year old girl. He was arrested and interrogated for two hours where the officers did not inform of him of the fifth and sixth amendments. In the result Miranda wrote the confession and also that he knew the rights associated with the interrogation. He was Sentenced to 20 to 30 years in prison on each charge. His attorney appealed the conviction to the Arizona Supreme Court because Miranda’s confession was used as evidence of being guilty in which violates the fifth amendment of cannot incriminate yourself. Plus he had the right for an attorney, but officers violated the sixth amendment.

Defendants side The police officers that were involved argued that Ernesto Miranda was not informed of his rights, but since he was arrested for a crime committed earlier they thought he had knowledge of them. Assuption was the cause of the voilation of rights toward a person.

Result!!!! The Arizona Supreme Court on a decision of 5 to 4 ruled that Ernesto Miranda was not guarenteed his rights of the fifth and sixth amendments, which overruled the conviction and dropped the charges of rape and kidnapping. When a man or woman gets arrested he has to be notified about his fifth and sixth amendments in order to not imprisonment himself and to hire an attorney to defend his conviction even if he or she cannot afford one.

Lasting result and closure Miranda V. Arizona changed criminal justice forever because for it created the “Miranda Rights” on people who are arrested and convicted have to be notified about his rights of self incriminate and the right to a attorney. That is why whenever you see on TV and a cop arrests a person he says “you have the right to remain silent.” To notify of his rights that he has upon interrogation