Search results
In 1966 Miranda v. Arizona (1966) the Supreme Court ruled that detained criminal suspects and there were police questioning and must be informed of their constitutional right to an attorney and against self-incrimination.
- Miranda VS. Arizona. Flashcards
Match. practice test for Miranda VS. Arizona. Learn with...
- landmark case
Q-Chat. Study with Quizlet and memorize flashcards...
- Miranda v. Arizona Essay Flashcards
Study with Quizlet and memorize flashcards containing terms...
- Miranda v Arizona Flashcards
Miranda v Arizona. This case represents the consolidation of...
- Miranda VS. Arizona. Flashcards
Study with Quizlet and memorize flashcards containing terms like What are the facts of the case?, What was used against Miranda in the lower court to convict him?, What was the initial ruling of the lower court? Was Miranda convicted or set free? and more.
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. On appeal, the Supreme Court of Arizona affirmed and held that ...
