Homework Help is Here – Start Your Trial Now!
Social Science
History
Look at the U.S history question. Summarize Source 5 and explain how the decisions the Warren Court made impacted people who were accused of committing crimes in the U.S.

Look at the U.S history question. Summarize Source 5 and explain how the decisions the Warren Court made impacted people who were accused of committing crimes in the U.S.

icon
Related questions
Question
Look at the U.S history question. Summarize Source 5 and explain how the decisions the Warren Court made impacted people who were accused of committing crimes in the U.S.
Source 5: www.oyez.org/cases/1965/759 Facts of the case: On March 13, 1963, Ernesto Miranda was arrested in his house and brought to the police station where he was questioned by police officers in connection with a kidnapping and rape. After two hours of interrogation, the police obtained a written confession from Miranda. The written confession was admitted into evidence at trial despite the objection of the defense attorney and the fact that the police officers admitted that they had not advised Miranda of his right to have an attorney present during the interrogation. The jury found Miranda guilty. The Court's Decision: 5-4 Decision for Miranda Chief Justice Earl Warren delivered the opinion of the 5-4 majority, concluding that defendant's interrogation violated the Fifth Amendment, which protects people from having to answering questions in order to avoid self-incrimination. To protect the privilege, the Court reasoned, procedural safeguards were required. A defendant was required to be warned before questioning that he had the right to remain silent, and that anything he said can be used against him in a court of law. A defendant was required to be told that he had the right to an attorney, and if he could not afford an attorney, one was to be appointed for him prior to any questioning if he so desired. After these warnings were given, a defendant could knowingly and intelligently waive these rights and agree to answer questions or make a statement. Evidence obtained as a result of interrogation was not to be used against a defendant at trial unless the prosecution demonstrated the warnings were given, and knowingly and intelligently waived.
Transcribed Image Text:Source 5: www.oyez.org/cases/1965/759 Facts of the case: On March 13, 1963, Ernesto Miranda was arrested in his house and brought to the police station where he was questioned by police officers in connection with a kidnapping and rape. After two hours of interrogation, the police obtained a written confession from Miranda. The written confession was admitted into evidence at trial despite the objection of the defense attorney and the fact that the police officers admitted that they had not advised Miranda of his right to have an attorney present during the interrogation. The jury found Miranda guilty. The Court's Decision: 5-4 Decision for Miranda Chief Justice Earl Warren delivered the opinion of the 5-4 majority, concluding that defendant's interrogation violated the Fifth Amendment, which protects people from having to answering questions in order to avoid self-incrimination. To protect the privilege, the Court reasoned, procedural safeguards were required. A defendant was required to be warned before questioning that he had the right to remain silent, and that anything he said can be used against him in a court of law. A defendant was required to be told that he had the right to an attorney, and if he could not afford an attorney, one was to be appointed for him prior to any questioning if he so desired. After these warnings were given, a defendant could knowingly and intelligently waive these rights and agree to answer questions or make a statement. Evidence obtained as a result of interrogation was not to be used against a defendant at trial unless the prosecution demonstrated the warnings were given, and knowingly and intelligently waived.
Expert Solution
steps

Step by step

Solved in 2 steps

SEE SOLUTIONCheck out a sample Q&A here
Blurred answer