Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

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

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Daniel Moody PD. 3 3/25/10 Miranda VS. Arizona 1966."— Presentation transcript:

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

2 Important Cases involving the Miranda Rights In 1963 Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Phoenix, Arizona. He was arrested for stealing $8.00 from bank worker. While in police custody he wrote a confession stating he did the robbery. And was accused of robbery and sentenced to jail. During the trial of Ernesto Arturo Miranda he did not specify for an attorney. ACLU urged the Supreme Court to require police interrogations.

3 White’s dissent Justice Byron White stated that self- incrimination forbids in- interrogation without the warnings specified. Believed that releasing the prisoner is not a loss or a gain. The court’s rule will return a killer to the streets to do more killings. White did not support the history of Fifth Amendment. Did not believe it had any basis in English common law. Did not want to get involved with the criminal processes.

4 Miranda vs. Arizona Continued Miranda’s right for the sixth amendment were violated and not given during interrogations. Two days later the police department said that his rights were given prior to the interrogations. Miranda did not get the right to remain silent and got arrested and questioned. Two weeks later the court said that the rights were given. the right to remain silent was not used before Miranda's arrest. The next trial started before March 1,1966 because of oral arguments.

5 Confession without rights. Police arrested Miranda and put him in a line up. Miranda asked what he did and got told he was identified by his victims. Miranda went for voice identification and was told was this the girl and Miranda said that’s her. Miranda was never told before being arrested his rights. 73-year old Alvin Moore was assigned to represent him. Moore objected to having any evidence against Miranda used during the trials.

6 Miranda VS. Arizona 1966 November of 1965 the Supreme court finally agreed to see the trial through. Miranda was not informed of the right to remain silent before interrogations. Miranda who as not educated in government,politcs, and laws did not know their rights. Gary Nelson was the spokesman for Arizona. He urged the justices to clarify their position. He also said that police should not advise the suspects that are captured.

7 Continued The second day people from other cases had arguments. Thurgood Marshall was the last to represent his stand during the trial. The decision was in Miranda's favor. People in custody are to have the right to remain silent. The opinion was released on June 1966. Police around the US started to issue Miranda rights.

8 Life after Miranda VS. Arizona The Supreme court set aside Miranda's case. Later he was convicted to 20-30 years in prison. Miranda was later paroled in 1972 and started selling autographed Miranda warning cards. Miranda was later arrested for minor driving offenses. And eventually lost his license. In January of 1976, Miranda was murdered with lettuce knife.

9 Life after the trial continued Miranda was always in cheap bars or clubs. He was arrested for having a gun. Those charges were dropped shortly after. Miranda lost his privilege to drive a car. The supreme court will now use better interrogation techniques. The two suspects involved one was arrested shortly after the death of Miranda the other escaped to Mexico.

10 This ends my representation of the Miranda VS. Arizona 1966 You have the right to remain silent.

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

Similar presentations

Ads by Google