Miranda v. Arizona: The Landmark Case That Gave Us the Right to Remain Silent (Summary)

Miranda v. Arizona, the 1966 Supreme Court case that gave us the now-famous "Miranda rights," was a game-changer in the world of criminal justice and civil liberties.

Ernesto Miranda, arrested for rape and kidnapping, confessed after a two-hour interrogation without being informed of his rights to remain silent and have an attorney present.

The Supreme Court's 5-4 decision ruled that Miranda's confession was inadmissible, as it violated his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and Sixth Amendment right to an attorney.

The Court held that suspects must be informed of their rights before questioning, giving birth to the now-ubiquitous Miranda warning: "You have the right to remain silent..."

The ruling wasn't just about Miranda; it was a check on police power, ensuring that the rights of the accused were protected in the face of intimidating interrogation tactics.

The case highlighted the importance of the Fifth Amendment's protection against self-incrimination, a fundamental right that had long been part of Anglo-American law.

Miranda v. Arizona also underscored the critical role of attorneys in the criminal justice system, with the Court emphasizing that the presence of a lawyer during questioning is a vital safeguard.

The case's impact extended far beyond the courtroom, becoming a cultural touchstone and a symbol of the rights of the individual against the power of the state.

Despite critiques that the ruling would hamper law enforcement, Miranda v. Arizona struck a balance between police powers and individual liberties that continues to shape criminal procedure today.

And what happened to Miranda? At a second trial, from which his confession was excluded, he was convicted. Miranda was later stabbed to death in 1976 during a bar fight in Phoenix. The person suspected of handing the knife to his murderer invoked his Miranda rights to police.