Miranda vs. Arizona Right to Remain Silent

1) Landmark Case: “Miranda vs. Arizona”

2) Landmark Case: “Miranda vs. Arizona” Ernesto Miranda was a poor Mexican immigrant who lived in Arizona in 1963. He was arrested after a woman identified him in a police lineup.

3) Landmark Case: “Miranda vs. Arizona” Miranda was charged with rape and kidnapping Police asked him questions about the crime for two hours.

4)Landmark Case: “Miranda vs. Arizona” In the United States, people who are accused of crimes have certain constitutional rights 5th Amendment- says they have the right to be silent 6th Amendment- says they have the right to a lawyer to help defend themselves

5) Landmark Case: “Miranda vs. Arizona” The police did not tell Miranda that he had these rights when they arrested him. After the police were finished asking Miranda questions, he signed a confession, which also stated that he acknowledged his rights.

6) Landmark Case: “Miranda vs. Arizona” The police used his confession in the trial and Miranda was convicted of the crime. The judge decided he should serve 20 to 30 years in prison for each crime.

7) Landmark Case: “Miranda vs. Arizona” Miranda appealed his case to the highest court in Arizona. His attorney argued the confession should not have been used as evidence because; Miranda had not been informed of his rights, and no attorney had been present to assist him during his interrogation.

8) Landmark Case: “Miranda vs. Arizona” The Arizona Supreme Court denied his appeal and upheld Miranda's conviction. The Supreme Court of the United States agreed to hear Miranda's case. The decision in Miranda v. Arizona was handed down in 1966.

9) Supreme Court rules in favor of Miranda; his conviction is overturned Supreme Court said: Miranda was NOT read his rights by the officers No attorney (lawyer) was present while he was being interrogated (questioned) by police because Miranda was never told he had the right to a lawyer

10. Miranda vs. Arizona ruling led to Miranda Rights Police officers have to read Miranda rights out loud to anyone being arrested and/or interrogated (questioned by police)

Gideon vs. Wainwright Right to a Lawyer

Sixth Amendment Review: People have a right to legal representation if they cannot afford it.

1. Fact of the Case: 1961: Police arrest Clarence Gideon for breaking into a pool hall and stealing money from the cigarette machine.

2. Facts of the Case: Gideon cannot afford a lawyer and the judge does not give him one. He defends himself in court and is found guilty. He is sentenced to five years in prison.

3. Facts of the Case: Gideon writes an appeal to the Supreme Court himself. He says his 6th amendment right was violated

4. Facts of the Case: Court said that states must provide free lawyers to defendants in all serious criminal cases.

Other Names for a Lawyer: Attorney Legal counsel Public Defender