"MIRANDA V. ARIZONA".
Analyzes political & legal ramifications of case expanding rights of accused. Impact on Supreme Court, social and law enforcement aspects, later rulings.
Miranda v. Arizona, a 1966 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren, required that police officers inform a criminal suspect... more
Miranda v. Arizona, a 1966 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren, required that police officers inform a criminal suspect of his or her basic constitutional rights, including the right to remain silent and the right to consult with an attorney, before the suspect may be questioned. Any incriminating statement made after arrest, but in the absence of such a warning, was inadmissible as evidence in a trial. Miranda has been called "certainly the most significant criminal law decision of the Warren era, if not in the entire history of the United States Supreme Court" (Lasser, 1988, p. 191).
It was also one of the most politically controversial decisions in the history of the Court. For conservatives, and indeed for many ordinary Americans, it served to gel the notion