Dasha Brianna Fishler
HJS 100
Professor: Dotan Greenwald
December 10th, 2017
Miranda Vs. Arizona
“The Miranda
rights deal with the rights of individuals, as they are basic rights possessed by
every American citizen.” (mirandarights3.weebly.com 2017)
Miranda vs.Arizona is a courtroom case that was argued on Feb 28, 1966; Mar 1, 1966;
Mar 2, 1966 in phoenix, Arizona. The action constitutes The Fifth Amendment prohibition
against self-incrimination applied in conformity with an individual in police custody or
‘deprived’ of his freedom, in any tremendous way. The decision 5-4 FOR miranda was
established on June 13, 1966. (oyez.org 2017)
On March 13, 1963, Miranda was captured in his house and brought to the police station
where he was questioned by police officers in connection with a kidnapping and rape case. After
2 long hours of interrogation, Miranda confessed and by the procedure wrote a formal statement
confessing to those allegations. That confession was admitted into evidence during the trial
despite the objection of the defense attorney. The police officers were honest and truthfully
stated that they had not disclosed the fact that Miranda had right to have an attorney present
1
during the interrogation. As a result of that the jury found Miranda guilty. On appeal, the
Supreme Court of Arizona claimed that Miranda’s constitutional rights were not violated because
he did not ask for an attorney. This case has brought up the following question: “Does the Fifth
Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination extend to the police interrogation of a
suspect? (oyez.org 2017)
The conclusion to this case was 5-4 for miranda, declaring that The Fifth Amendment
requires the law enforcement officials advise suspects of their right to remain silent have their
attorney present during interrogations while in custody. (thirteen.org 2006) The Court held that,
in each of the cases, the interrogation techniques used did not fall into the coercive category, but
