Sunday, April 24, 2011

Miranda v. Arizona

The Supreme Court case of Miranda v. Arizona is perhaps among the top most monumental Supreme Court cases and decisions in the history of America. Ernesto Miranda, a convicted kidnapper and rapist was arrested by police officers and submitted to two hours of interrogation, during which signed a written confession, disclosing the crimes he had committed, all without knowing his rights or having them read to him. He was found guilty, and he appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court arguing that his Fifth Amendment rights had been violated. The Supreme Court decided in favor of Miranda by a vote of 5 to 4, with Chief Justice Earl Warren writing for the majority opinion. The Court stated that a prosecutor could not use a statement "stemming from custodial interrogation of the defendant unless it demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the privilege against self-incrimination."

I agree wholeheartedly with the Supreme Court's decision on this case because it has been mandated for every single arrest since then. It is essential that every person knows the rights guaranteed to them by the Constitution, and if they don't, then they should be told those rights when their freedom and their lives are in jeopardy.

The YouTube video below explains the rights established by the case of Miranda v. Arizona and takes a skeptical, questioning point of view with regards to the decision of the case. The narrator argues that the case may or may not have been directly in the Constitution, yet, I believe that the judicial branch of government, specifically the U.S. Supreme Court, has the right and ability to interpret the laws of the Constitution and establish precedents from their interpretations.


The Fifth Amendment guarantees trial by a Grand Jury, guarantees due process and does not allow for double jeopardy and unwarranted search and seizures. Specifically with respect to this case, the Fifth Amendment guarantees that "no person...shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself."

No comments:

Post a Comment