1966 Chief Justice Warren’s handwritten notes about the case. http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/treasures/trr038.html
When an 18 year old girl was raped in 1963 a man named Ernesto Miranda was arrested after his girlfriend’s car was identified as the one used by the rapist. http://www.thecapras.org/mcapra/miranda/rights.html
During two-hours of questioning, Mr. Miranda, who was never offered a lawyer, confessed to kidnapping and raping an 18-year-old woman 11 days earlier. http://pinoytutorial.com/lifebytes/ernesto-miranda-and-the-miranda-warning- amendment/
http://www.thecapras.org/mcapra/miranda/rights.html The victim did not positively identify Miranda but said that he bore the closest resemblance to her attacker.
His first criminal offense had been in the eighth grade. He’d spent time in reform school and prison. He’d been arrested for crimes in California, Texas, Tennessee, and Arizona. He even spent time in jail while in the army and had been dishonorably discharged, http://www.roitz.com/Page_1.html
The confession had a paragraph typed at the top which stated the confession was made "with full knowledge of my legal rights, understanding any statement I make may be used against me." http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=10165
At trial, no evidence was presented that Miranda had ever been told that he did not have to talk to police or that he had the right to a lawyer. The defense objected to letting the jury see the confession, but the judge overruled the objection. http://pinoytutorial.com/lifebytes/ernesto-miranda-and-the-miranda-warning- amendment/
The jury found Miranda guilty of kidnapping and rape. He was sentenced to 20 to 30 years on each of the two counts, to be served concurrently. http://law.jrank.org/pages/3105/Ernesto-Miranda-Trials-1963-1967.html
Miranda's attorneys appealed. First unsuccessfully to the Arizona Supreme Court, and next to the U.S. Supreme Court. http://law.jrank.org/pages/3105/Ernesto- Miranda-Trials-1963-1967.html
On June 13, 1966, the U.S. Supreme Court, in deciding the case of MIRANDA v. ARIZONA, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), reversed the Arizona Court's decision, granted Miranda a new trial at which his confession could not be admitted as evidence, and established the "Miranda" rights of persons accused of crimes.MIRANDA v. ARIZONA, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) http://www.trutv.com/library/c rime/notorious_murders/not_g uilty/miranda/4.html
"You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to be speak to an attorney, and to have an attorney present during any questioning. If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be provided for you at government expense.
Ernesto Miranda was given a second trial at which his confession was not presented. Based on the evidence, Miranda was again convicted of kidnapping and rape. He was paroled from prison in 1972 having served 11 years. http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/not_guilty/miranda/4.html
In 1976, Ernesto Miranda, age 34, was stabbed to death in a fight. Police arrested a suspect who, after choosing to exercise his Miranda rights of silence, was released and fled to Mexico. http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/not_guilty/miranda/4.h tml http://www.icue.com/por tal/site/iCue/flatview/?c uecard=5210