Ask your own question, for FREE!
History 19 Online
OpenStudy (anonymous):

Miranda’s conviction was overturned by the __________ because his Constitutional right to a __________ was violated. A. district court . . . fair trial B. state supreme court . . . attorney C. intermediate supreme court . . . fair trial D. United States Supreme Court . . . fair trial

OpenStudy (paki):

what you guess about the answer here... ?

OpenStudy (anonymous):

I wanna say answer A

OpenStudy (paki):

i am pretty sure about C here...

OpenStudy (anonymous):

its d i had a lesson on this yesterday in class

OpenStudy (anonymous):

i can post it here if you want

OpenStudy (paki):

yeah post it... @me11

OpenStudy (anonymous):

lol it wont let me message becoming correctly

OpenStudy (paki):

but i am pretty sure about my answer @me11

OpenStudy (anonymous):

ok

OpenStudy (anonymous):

In the Supreme Court case Miranda v. Arizona, the court examined the rights protected in the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. Ernesto Miranda was arrested after a crime victim identified him in a police lineup. The police officers questioning him did not inform him of his Fifth Amendment right that prevents government from forcing citizens to give evidence against themselves. He also was not informed of his Sixth Amendment right to the assistance of an attorney. If people are not aware of their rights, they might say things that unfairly hurt their own case while being questioned by police. Miranda eventually wrote a statement that said he was guilty of the crimes. This confession was used to convict him in court. Miranda appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court. His lawyers argued that his confession should not have been used in the trial because he had not been informed of his rights. The Arizona Supreme Court denied his appeal. Miranda appealed his case to the Supreme Court. In 1966, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case and ruled in favor of Miranda. As a result, police officers now read the Miranda warning to suspects before they are arrested. This helps ensure suspects understand they have the right to not answer questions, or say anything at all, if they choose. However, if a suspect chooses to speak despite the Miranda warning, what they say could be used in court. The Miranda warning also explains that suspects have the right speak to an attorney.

OpenStudy (anonymous):

there you go the miranda vs ariona court case

OpenStudy (anonymous):

So is it B

OpenStudy (anonymous):

d on this question

OpenStudy (anonymous):

oh ok

OpenStudy (anonymous):

@paki read what i posted

OpenStudy (paki):

still C...

OpenStudy (anonymous):

lol its d im sure

OpenStudy (anonymous):

It was D

OpenStudy (anonymous):

that was a lot of questions you sent through messaging lol

Can't find your answer? Make a FREE account and ask your own questions, OR help others and earn volunteer hours!

Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!
Can't find your answer? Make a FREE account and ask your own questions, OR help others and earn volunteer hours!

Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!