Miranda v. Arizona

Miranda v. Arizona (consolidated with Westover v. United States, Vignera v. New York, and California v. Stewart), {{ussc|384|436|1966}}, was a landmark 5-4 decision of the United States Supreme Court which was argued February 28–March 1, 1966 and decided June 13, 1966. The Court held that suspects, prior to being interrogated by police, must be informed of their rights under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

Prior history

The Legal Aid Movement

During the 1960s, a movement to provide indigent defendants with legal aid emerged from the collective efforts of various public interest groups.

Related Topics:
1960s - Defendant - Legal aid

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In the civil realm, it led to the creation of the ancestor of the Legal Services Corporation under the Great Society program of President Lyndon B. Johnson (although LSC as it exists today would not be created until 1974). In the criminal realm, the movement was bolstered by such Supreme Court decisions as Gideon v. Wainwright, {{ussc|372|335|1963}}, that held that indigent defendants had a right to be provided with counsel. Drawing on Gideon, the Supreme Court, in Escobedo v. Illinois, {{ussc|378|478|1964}}, a case which closely foreshadowed Miranda, held that defendants in custody had a right to consult with their attorneys, even before they were indicted.

Related Topics:
Civil - Legal Services Corporation - Great Society - Lyndon B. Johnson - Criminal - Gideon v. Wainwright - Escobedo v. Illinois

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

This reform impulse extended to a concern over police interrogation practices, which were considered by many to be barbaric and unjust. Coercive interrogation tactics were known in period slang as the "third degree."

Related Topics:
Interrogation - Slang

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Reformers believed that the accused would not be trapped into giving a confession, and the adversarial process would be better served, if accused criminals were to be provided with a lawyer. As early as 1952, Federal Bureau of Investigation director J. Edgar Hoover stated that

Related Topics:
Adversarial process - 1952 - Federal Bureau of Investigation - J. Edgar Hoover

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Special Agents are taught that any suspect or arrested person, at the outset of an interview, must be advised that he is not required to make a statement and that any statement given can be used against him in court. Moreover, the individual must be informed that, if he desires, he may obtain the services of an attorney of his own choice.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

However, state reform efforts lagged behind federal efforts. Miranda would constitutionalize the reform impulse.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~