“You have the right to remain silent” is the well-known introduction to a series of statements police are required to communicate to accused criminals upon arrest. Known as the Miranda warning, these famous instructions are a direct result of the Supreme Court case Miranda v. Arizona. Ernesto Miranda, an Arizona laborer, was arrested in 1963 and convicted of raping a woman. He appealed his conviction and the Supreme Court overturned the decision, determining that Arizona authorities had violated two constitutional amendments. Miranda v. Arizona: The Rights of the Accused offers a clear understanding of the history of this decision and its consequences. Before the Miranda warning, it was not uncommon for police station confessions to be obtained by intimidation, making false promises, psychological game-playing, physical torture, or exploiting the ignorance of the accused. The Supreme Court’s decision allowed that the privileges granted to a defendant in a courtroom—the right to counsel, the right to due process, and the right to not witness against oneself—were now extended to the police station.
Full-color photographs. Glossary. Sidebars. Chronology/Timeline. Further reading. Bibliography. Source notes. Index.
About the Author(s)
Larry A. Van Meter, a native of Phoenix, Arizona, is an English teacher at York College in Nebraska. Before earning his doctorate in English at Texas A&M University, he served in the U.S. Navy as a cryptologist.