Miranda v - Adrian Gil Block 2 Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S....

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Adrian Gil Block 2 Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) – 5 th Amendment Summation of Fact: The two parties involved in this court case are Ernesto Arturo Miranda and the state of Arizona. The basic facts are that the police department in Arizona arrested Miranda for the rape and kidnapping of and 18 year old girl. They interrogated him and ended up making him sign a statement where he confessed to the alleged crimes and agreed that he was not being forced to sign the statement and he knew all his rights. However, Miranda was never told of his right to remain silent and of his right to counsel. These two rights are clearly stated in the Fifth and Sixth Amendment. Still Miranda was convicted and was going to face anything from 40 – 60 years in prison. Miranda’s Lawyer, Alvin Moore, fought against Miranda’s conviction stating that he was not told his rights by the police officers and in consequence the signing of the document was in a way not fully voluntarily. When it went to Arizona’s Supreme Court, they said that Miranda did not on his own request an attorney and therefore the evidence would stay. It was
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 02/05/2012 for the course ENGLISH 101 taught by Professor Mills during the Spring '11 term at CSU Pueblo.

Page1 / 3

Miranda v - Adrian Gil Block 2 Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S....

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online