1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Mariulka [41]
3 years ago
12

How did the Supreme Court rule in the Miranda decision?

History
2 answers:
KIM [24]3 years ago
6 0

Answer:

Guilty.

Explanation:

In Miranda v. Arizona (1966), the Supreme Court ruled that detained criminal suspects, prior to police questioning, must be informed of their constitutional right to an attorney and against self-incrimination. In the landmark supreme court case Miranda v. Arizona (1966), the Court held that if police do not inform people they arrest about certain constitutional rights, including their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, then their confessions may not be used as evidence at trial.

uranmaximum [27]3 years ago
4 0

Answer:

That contained suspects must be informed of their rights

Explanation:

You might be interested in
All of the following are provisions of the Preamble except
scZoUnD [109]

Answer:

The Preamble is part of the Deceleration of Independence, and I'm pretty sure that preserving the articles of confederation wasn't part of the preamble.

Explanation:

7 0
1 year ago
The Mayflower Compact established a tradition of government where
balandron [24]

Answer:

c

Explanation:

3 0
3 years ago
Can someone give me 5 supporting details on why can’t the president leave the White House alone and governmental political group
slamgirl [31]

Answer: for his own protection.

Explanation: He can only leave with his Secret Service men. Besides if he wanted a pizza or beer or something all he had to do was make a phone call down to the kitchen and it’s done

3 0
3 years ago
Antifederalists and Federalists debated about the language in the U.S. Constitution. Which of the
WARRIOR [948]

Answer:

Anti-Federalists argued that the Constitution gave too much power to the federal government. While taking too much power away from state and local governments.

(C) AND (B)

I hope i helped!

Explanation:

7 0
3 years ago
What was an unintended effect of the Writs of Assistance passed by Great Britain on the colonies after the French and Indian War
pishuonlain [190]

Answer:

D. It angered colonists who felt they were being searched without warrant.

Explanation:

4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • Which answer best describes how the Supreme Court viewed Maryland's taxing of the national bank created after the War of 1812?
    8·2 answers
  • Which tactic did Vladimir Lenin not employ following the Russian Revolution?
    12·2 answers
  • The population of the United states 100,000,000 by which year?
    12·1 answer
  • Theodora was Justinian’s wife and empress but did not advise or help the emperor in any way.
    6·1 answer
  • Those who attacked Roosevelt for using too much federal power in New Deal measures feared:
    15·1 answer
  • In 1846, Polk decalred that Mexico had invaded the U.S. and “shed
    12·1 answer
  • PLEASE HELP ME THANKS IF YOU DO HAVE A GOID DAY
    12·1 answer
  • What are the two ways to read the constitution?
    10·1 answer
  • C) Identify ONE specific pattern in the way in which colonized
    7·1 answer
  • Ancient Chinese saying: “when things have reached their peak, they ____.”
    5·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!