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

What was the nature of the disagreement about the terms under which former confederate states might rejoin the union after the c

Gelneren [198K]

Answer:

The Radical Republicans thought Lincoln was going too easy on the South so they made up their own terms is the correct answer.

Explanation:

8 0

3 years ago

Which best describes the battle between Spain and the United States near the Phillipines?

vovikov84 [41]

The United States won the naval battle easily.

7 0

3 years ago

How did Christianity grow and impact the Roman Empire?

tekilochka [14]

Answer: ( give brainliest)

Over time, the Christian church and faith grew more organized. In 313 AD, the Emperor Constantine issued the Edict of Milan, which accepted Christianity: 10 years later, it had become the official religion of the Roman Empire.

4 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Isolationism, FDR wins

DedPeter [7]

Answer:

Many leaders of the Democratic Party saw in Roosevelt an attractive mixture of ... and a shaper of public opinion, observed acidly of Roosevelt

Explanation:

3 0

2 years ago

What is the difference between a Direct Democracy and a Representative

hammer [34]

Answer:

I think answer is D.

Hope you like answer

4 0

3 years ago