Miranda Rights

Miranda Rights

  • Category:Criminal
  • Date:1966
  • Client:Miranda v. Arizona (1966)

  • About This Case

    The landmark 1966 Supreme Court case Miranda v. Arizona revolutionized criminal procedure by establishing that suspects must be informed of their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and Sixth Amendment right to counsel during custodial interrogations. This case introduced the now-iconic "Miranda warnings."

    In 1963, Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Phoenix, Arizona, for kidnapping and rape. After a two-hour interrogation, he signed a written confession, which was used to convict him. However, Miranda was never informed of his right to remain silent or consult an attorney.

  • Challenge

    His appeal argued that his confession was unconstitutional, leading the Supreme Court to consolidate his case with three others involving similar violations.

    • 5th Amendment Violation
    • 6th Amendment Violation
    • Admissibility of Confessions

  • Our Process

    • 1. Lower Courts

      Miranda was convicted in Arizona courts; his confession was deemed admissible.

    • 2. Supreme Court Appeal

      Argued February–March 1966.

    • 3. Decision

      5-4 ruling in favor of Miranda (June 13, 1966). Chief Justice Warren emphasized that custodial environments are inherently coercive, requiring procedural safeguards.

  • Result

    The Court mandated that police inform suspects of their rights before questioning: Right to remain silent. Statements can be used against them. Right to an attorney (appointed if indigent). Right to stop questioning anytime.

The landmark 1966 Supreme Court case Miranda v. Arizona revolutionized criminal procedure by establishing that suspects must be informed of their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and Sixth Amendment right to counsel during custodial interrogations. This case introduced the now-iconic “Miranda warnings.”