Los derechos miranda
Páginas: 2 (272 palabras)
Publicado: 10 de junio de 2010
Panama, June 4th 2010.
Universidad Latina
Law School
Subject: Legal English
Professor: Marco Antonio Austin
Student: Florencia M. de Mckernan
Identification:8-468-643
Paper reasearch about MIRANDA RIGHTS.
Ernesto Arturo Miranda was convicted on kidnapping, rape, and armed robbery charges based on his confession under policeinterrogation resulted in the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case (Miranda v. Arizona). This Court case ruled that crimal suspects must be informed of their right againstself-incrimination and their right to consult with an attorney prior to questioning by police. His confession without rights started Miranda v. Arizona.
This had asignificant impact on law enforcement in The United States of America, by making what became known as the Miranda rights a part of routine police procedure to ensure thatsuspects were informed of their rights.
The MIRANDA WARNINGS.
The suspect must be properly advised of their Miranda rights, the Fifth Amendment right against compelledself incrimation (and, in furtherance of this right, the right to counsel while in custody). The suspect must understand this warning.
Before any interrogation begins,the police must advise the suspect that they have:
1. The right to remain silent;
2. That anything the suspect says can and will be used against him in a court oflaw;
3. That the suspect has the right to have an attorney;
4. If you can not afford an attorney, one will be appointed to you;
5. Do you understand thisrights and they have been read to you?
In our Constitution some similar rules protect our FUNDAMENTAL GUARANTEES on the TITLE III, Chapter I, Articles 21, 22, 23 and 25
Universidad Latina
Law School
Subject: Legal English
Professor: Marco Antonio Austin
Student: Florencia M. de Mckernan
Identification:8-468-643
Paper reasearch about MIRANDA RIGHTS.
Ernesto Arturo Miranda was convicted on kidnapping, rape, and armed robbery charges based on his confession under policeinterrogation resulted in the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case (Miranda v. Arizona). This Court case ruled that crimal suspects must be informed of their right againstself-incrimination and their right to consult with an attorney prior to questioning by police. His confession without rights started Miranda v. Arizona.
This had asignificant impact on law enforcement in The United States of America, by making what became known as the Miranda rights a part of routine police procedure to ensure thatsuspects were informed of their rights.
The MIRANDA WARNINGS.
The suspect must be properly advised of their Miranda rights, the Fifth Amendment right against compelledself incrimation (and, in furtherance of this right, the right to counsel while in custody). The suspect must understand this warning.
Before any interrogation begins,the police must advise the suspect that they have:
1. The right to remain silent;
2. That anything the suspect says can and will be used against him in a court oflaw;
3. That the suspect has the right to have an attorney;
4. If you can not afford an attorney, one will be appointed to you;
5. Do you understand thisrights and they have been read to you?
In our Constitution some similar rules protect our FUNDAMENTAL GUARANTEES on the TITLE III, Chapter I, Articles 21, 22, 23 and 25
Leer documento completo
Regístrate para leer el documento completo.