Title: Why Are Miranda Rights Important? — #LadyJustice Speaks
Headings: Why Are Miranda Rights Important?
Why Are Miranda Rights Important?
History of Miranda Rights — Who Was Ernesto Miranda?
What Is the Right to an Attorney?
What Is the Right to Remain Silent?
What if I Did Not Receive the Miranda Rights Warning?
If You Are Facing Criminal Charges, Contact Just Criminal Law Today

Content: At trial, Miranda was convicted of kidnapping and rape received a sentence of 20 to 30 years in prison. Miranda appealed his case to the Arizona Supreme Court, but the conviction was upheld. Miranda then petitioned the United States Supreme Court to hear his case. He was represented pro bono by the ACLU, whose lawyers argued that Miranda’s Fifth Amendment rights had been violated. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, along with three other similar cases, to clarify its ruling in Escobedo v. Illinois, where the court stated that it was a violation of the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments when police do not give a suspect an opportunity to consult with a lawyer and do not warn a suspect of their constitutional right to remain silent. Miranda’s lawyers added a claim under the Fifth Amendment because Miranda had not been advised of his right to remain silent when he had been arrested and questioned, noting that an emotionally disturbed man like Miranda, who was not well educated, could not be expected to know his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Miranda, finding that a suspect who is in custody must be warned, before interrogation, of his right to remain silent, that anything he says will be used against him in court; that he has a right to consult with a lawyer during the interrogation, and that if he cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Miranda, finding that a suspect who is in custody must be warned, before interrogation, of his right to remain silent, that anything he says will be used against him in court; that he has a right to consult with a lawyer during the interrogation, and that if he cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed.