Miranda vs. Arizona 1966.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Christina Ascolillo.  Who was involved: Ernesto Miranda and the State of Arizona.  When:  Where: Phoenix, Arizona  Why: Arrested and charged.

Advertisements

From Crime to Doing Time What Courts Do

Presented by Tim, and Brendan. Arizona V. Miranda.

CH 14 Citizenship and Equal Justice

Chapter 14, Section 3 THE RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED

Supreme Court Cases Use your knowledge of the Bill of Rights to determine how the Supreme Court should rule for each case.

The Government must respect ALL legal rights of all people. It must treat people fairly.

What would society look like if Eric Cartman was a police officer.

The Investigation Phase Criminal Law and Procedure.

Vivek Barbhaiya and John Coriasco

Do you know your civil rights?

Miranda Rights 5th Amendment

Warren Court. Warm-up Do you have rights when you are being arrested? What rights do you have?

Miranda v. Arizona.

BY: KATIE LOSINIECKI Miranda v. Arizona. Facts Ernesto Miranda was arrested in 1966 for the kidnapping and rape of an 18 year old woman After being interrogated.

Miranda v. Arizona Background Information - Phoenix, Arizona Ernesto Miranda arrested for kidnapping and rape -Interrogated for 2 hrs and.

1966 Chief Justice Warren’s handwritten notes about the case.

Miranda v Arizona Escobedo v Illinois By Austin Lallier.

Daniel Moody PD. 3 3/25/10 Miranda VS. Arizona 1966.

■Essential Question ■Essential Question: –How did the decisions of the Supreme Court impact civil liberties in the 1960s & 1970s? ■Warm-Up Question: –?

Journal– 3/8/12 Read the article “Searching for Details Online, Lawyers Facebook the Jury” and answer the questions on the back of your packet .

Miranda v. Arizona. Facts of the Case Police arrest Ernesto Miranda after the victim identifies him in lineup Police interrogate Miranda for two hours.

U.S. Constitutional Amendments 1-10

Reem K, Madeline R, Miranda G, Emily K, & Britney F Government 4 th Hour Mr. Baker.

Bell Ringer Read the article “Searching for Details Online, Lawyers Facebook the Jury” and answer the questions. Be ready to discuss your answers with.

III. Rights of the Accused. A. Exclusionary Rule Exclusionary Rule – Supreme Court ruled any evidence collected illegally cannot be used in federal court.

Chapter 1 The Pursuit of Justice Unit #1 Notes Packet.

Miranda v Arizona Rights of the Accused. Citations 384 U.S. 436 (1966) oDocket # 759 oArgued February 28, 1966 o Decider June 13, 1966.

Chapter 22 Rights of the Accused. A. Protections 1.Nothing can protect you against being accused of a crime 2.5 th, 6 th and 8 th Amendments help protect.

Call To Order Complete the following statement: You have the right to remain silent… And take out your homework!!!

Promptbook  During our last class, we discussed Marbury v. Madison and the idea of judicial review. This will be the topic of your essay assignment. 1.In.

Miranda vs. Arizona Right to Remain Silent.

Ashley Nine March 25, 2010 Period 7.  Poor living immigrant from Mexico living in Arizona.  He was charged with rape and kidnapping.  He was arrested.

Unit 4 Lesson 8: Miranda v. Arizona

Miranda v. Arizona. Ernesto Miranda 1966 Charged & convicted of kidnapping, rape, and armed robbery charges second trial, with his confession excluded.

Busted! Judith A. Schechter Lexington School for the Deaf.

Arrests and Miranda.  Right to a grand jury  Protection against double jeopardy  Protection against self-incrimination  Right to due process  Custody.

 Online Miranda quiz Online Miranda quiz. The constitutional implications of custodial interrogation.

Supreme Court Cases on Self Incrimination Sarah Claypoole.

Miranda V. Arizona By: Elise Kloppenburg. Facts of the Case Phoenix, Arizona 1963 Ernesto Miranda, 23 years old Arrested in his home Taken to the police.

How have the decisions of the Supreme Court protected people accused of crimes? What rights are accused people guaranteed? Landmark Supreme Court Cases.

Supreme Court Cases of the 60s. Mapp v. Ohio, 1961 What happened? - illegal search of home found “obscene materials”. Mapp was convicted. Brought to court.

The Warren Court and judicial activism “The biggest damn fool mistake I ever made”, Dwight D. Eisenhower on Earl Warren, quoted in 1977 Chief Justice,

 Dates: Debated: Feb. 28, March 1 and 2, 1966 Decided: June 13, 1966  Ruling: The prosecution could not use Miranda's confession as evidence in a criminal.

The Judicial System What Courts Do and Crime. Stages of Criminal Justice.

Entry Into the System Arrests and Miranda.

Miranda v. Arizona.

Marisa Hanning Emily Bendik Katie Kraeer

Miranda Rights.

Warm-up Has anyone tried to get you to confess to something you didn’t do? How did this happen? Have you ever confessed to something and then regretted.

Miranda Rights Reem K, Madeline R, Miranda G, Emily K, & Britney F

Landmark Supreme Court Cases

Tori Roupe and Haley Leavines

Aim: What are the protections offered by the case of Miranda vs

Amendments in ACTION: The Fifth Amendment

Important Court Cases of the 20th Century

Miranda v. Arizona (1966) U.S. Supreme Court Case Study Project

Miranda v. Arizona 1966.

Miranda v. Arizona (1966) The Warren Court.

Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court formed the basis for the exercise of judicial.

Landmark Supreme Court Cases

Fifth and Sixth Amendments

Miranda Rights You have the right to remain silent…

Amendments in ACTION: The Fifth Amendment

Amendments in ACTION: The Fifth Amendment

by Marcos Cardona-7th period

Miranda v. Arizona Matthew & Noah.

Miranda vs. Arizona.

Marisa Hanning Emily Bendik Katie Kraeer

By: Michaela Hull and Elena Butler

Presentation transcript:

Miranda vs. Arizona 1966

Background Who: Ernesto Miranda Where: Phoenix, Arizona What: Accused of kidnapping and other crimes When: 1960’s Why: Miranda confessed to his crime after two hours of interrogation, having never been informed of his right to an attorney or the right to remain silent. Sentenced to 20-30 years.

Essential Question of the Case Does interrogating criminal suspects without notifying them of their right to a lawyer and their protection against self-incrimination violate the Fifth Amendment?

The Supreme Court Hears the Case Miranda’s conviction was overturned. Interrogations can “overbear the will” All suspects must be given the full opportunity to exercise the “privilege against self-incrimination”. Interrogations may be halted until an attorney arrives.

So What? What can happen to a suspect who proved that he/she was not informed of the Miranda rights when questioned by police?