Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Miranda v. Arizona (1966): Just in all Cases?. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
A 4 page exploration of this critical case. The author contends that the overall good that is accomplished by the Miranda requirement outweighs the fact that occasionally criminals escape prosecution because they were not read their rights at the time of apprehension and arrest. Bibliography lists 3 sources.
Page Count:
3 pages (~225 words per page)
File: AM2_PPlwMir2.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
Thanks to the preoccupation of modern television programming with law enforcement and crime,
most Americans are familiar with the legal necessity of what is popularly termed "reading the rights" or "Mirandizing". These terms relate to a key 1966 ruling in Miranda verses
Arizona. In that one critical ruling the face of the interview process as an investigative technique in law enforcement has been forever changed. Although the Miranda verses Arizona
ruling has subsequently been challenged a number of times, it has stood the test of time. Its endurance is attributable to the fact that it is indeed appropriate in
ALL cases. The justification for this contention is that the overall good that is accomplished by the Miranda requirement outweighs the fact that occasionally criminals escape prosecution because they were
not read their rights at the time of apprehension and arrest. Miranda verses Arizona demonstrates the systems of checks and balances that have
been instituted in our country to protect individual rights. The Miranda verses Arizona case revolved around the permissibility of use of exculpatory or incupatory statements elicited through law enforcement
questioning after a person has been taken into police custody or deprived of his freedom of action in any other significant way. Procedural safeguards ensuring the Fifth Amendment privilege
against self incrimination, the "right to remain silent unless he chooses to speak in the unfettered exercise of his own will" (384 U.S. 437) was reinforced as a result of
this case. The Supreme Court decided in Miranda verses Arizona that the Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination must be protected through adequate
...