Miranda Vs Arizona 384 US 436 Summary

Words: 1149
Pages: 5
Open Document
The Case: Miranda v Arizona 384 U.S. 436 (1966)

The Facts: In Miranda v Arizona, Ernesto Miranda was arrested for his suspected connection with a rape. Miranda was taken by police to the station where he was questioned in an interrogation room by two officers. At no point was Miranda advised that he had the right to have an attorney present. Two hours into the interrogation Miranda had signed a confession. At the top of the signed confession the document stated that Miranda’s confession “was made voluntarily, without threats or promises of immunity and with full knowledge of my legal rights, understanding any statement I make may be used against me.” Miranda’s attorney requested that the confession be suppressed. The request was denied, the confession entered into evidence, …show more content…
New York, Vignera was arrested for a robbery of a dress shop. Vignera was taken to police headquarters. Once there he orally admitted to committing the robbery and was formally placed under arrest. He was then taken to another police precinct and questioned by the assistant district attorney. His conversation with the ADA was recorder by a hearing reporter. The oral confession and the transcript from the questioning of the ADA were presented to the Jury. Vignera was found guilty of robbery in the first degree. The conviction was affirmed without opinion by the Appellate Division and the Court of Appeals.
In Westover v. United States, Westover was arrested by Kansas City Police in connection to two robberies. While in custody, a report was received from the FBI noting Westover was wanted on a felony charges in California. Westover was interrogated by local police. The next morning, FBI agents continued the interrogation. Westover signed confessions to each of the two robberies in California. These statements made in the interrogation and the confessions were presented at trial. Westover was convicted of the California robberies. The conviction was affirmed by the Court of
Show More

Related Documents: Miranda Vs Arizona 384 US 436 Summary

Miranda Project

CCJS234 Miranda Memo Project April 4th, 2011 To: Clifford Stoddard Date: April 4th, 2011 RE: John Smith Murder Charges Question Presented: When a police officer intimidates a suspect after the suspect refused to talk and asked for counsel was his Fifth Amendment right violated? Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S 477 (1981), a suspect who has invoked his rights to remain silent cannot later waive that right unless he initiates the conversation and does so knowingly and…

Words 902 - Pages 4