Miranda vs Arizona

in 1963, Ernesto Miranda was charged with rape, kidnapping, and robbery. Miranda was not informed about his rights before he was interrogated. After the police had interrogated him for two hours, Ernesto confessed to the crimes. the police were recording the whole interrogation. Ernesto had a history of being mentally unstable.

In the trial, the confession was the only thing the prosecution used. Ernesto was convicted, and was sentenced to twenty or thirty years in prison. But Ernesto appealed to the Arizona supreme court. he said that the police got his confession, unconstitutionally. The court disagreed. Then Ernesto Appealed to the U.S. Supreme court.

the U.S supreme court ruled 5-4 in favor of Ernesto. the they said the court was not able to use Miranda's confession because, The police had not informed him that he had the right to an attorney. they repeated the trial, without the confession, and Ernesto was convicted again.

This impacts anyone who get's arrested today. that case introduced the "Miranda Right's". If that case would not have happened, we might not have had something like the "Miranda Right's".