160 likes | 584 Views
Chief Justice Warren’s handwritten notes about the case. 1966. Miranda vs Arizona. http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/treasures/trr038.html. When an 18 year old girl was raped in 1963 a man named Ernesto Miranda was arrested after his girlfriend’s car was identified as the one used by the rapist.
E N D
Chief Justice Warren’s handwritten notes about the case. 1966 Miranda vs Arizona http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/treasures/trr038.html
When an 18 year old girl was raped in 1963 a man named Ernesto Miranda was arrested after his girlfriend’s car was identified as the one used by the rapist. How it started http://www.thecapras.org/mcapra/miranda/rights.html
1963 During two-hours of questioning, Mr. Miranda, who was never offered a lawyer, confessed to kidnapping and raping an 18-year-old woman 11 days earlier. http://pinoytutorial.com/lifebytes/ernesto-miranda-and-the-miranda-warning-amendment/
Identified in a line up? The victim did not positively identify Miranda but said that he bore the closest resemblance to her attacker. http://www.thecapras.org/mcapra/miranda/rights.html
Miranda was no stranger to police • His first criminal offense had been in the eighth grade. • He’d spent time in reform school and prison. • He’d been arrested for crimes in California, Texas, Tennessee, and Arizona. • He even spent time in jail while in the army and had been dishonorably discharged, http://www.roitz.com/Page_1.html
The confession The confession had a paragraph typed at the top which stated the confession was made "with full knowledge of my legal rights, understanding any statement I make may be used against me." http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=10165
The trial - At trial, no evidence was presented that Miranda had ever been told that he did not have to talk to police or that he had the right to a lawyer. The defense objected to letting the jury see the confession, but the judge overruled the objection. http://pinoytutorial.com/lifebytes/ernesto-miranda-and-the-miranda-warning-amendment/
The verdict The jury found Miranda guilty of kidnapping and rape. He was sentenced to 20 to 30 years on each of the two counts, to be served concurrently. http://law.jrank.org/pages/3105/Ernesto-Miranda-Trials-1963-1967.html
The appeal Miranda's attorneys appealed. First unsuccessfully to the Arizona Supreme Court, and next to the U.S. Supreme Court. http://law.jrank.org/pages/3105/Ernesto-Miranda-Trials-1963-1967.html
On June 13, 1966, the U.S. Supreme Court, in deciding the case of MIRANDA v. ARIZONA, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), reversed the Arizona Court's decision, granted Miranda a new trial at which his confession could not be admitted as evidence, and established the "Miranda" rights of persons accused of crimes. http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/not_guilty/miranda/4.html June 1966
"You have the right to remainsilent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to be speak to an attorney, and to have an attorney present during any questioning. If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be provided for you at government expense.
What happened to miranda? Ernesto Miranda was given a second trial at which his confession was not presented. Based on the evidence, Miranda was again convicted of kidnapping and rape. He was paroled from prison in 1972 having served 11 years. http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/not_guilty/miranda/4.html
An ironic end to his life In 1976, Ernesto Miranda, age 34, was stabbed to death in a fight. Police arrested a suspect who, after choosing to exercise his Miranda rights of silence, was released and fled to Mexico. http://www.icue.com/portal/site/iCue/flatview/?cuecard=5210 http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/not_guilty/miranda/4.html