An extensive analysis of two complementary rights of the accused, their interpretation by the U.S. Supreme Court, and the ongoing debate over their role in the criminal justice system.
In 1963, Ernesto Miranda, a poor Mexican immigrant, was arrested in Phoenix, Arizona, for kidnapping and rape. After a two-hour interrogation resulting in a confession, Miranda was convicted and sentenced to 60 years in prison. But the police had never informed him of his right to counsel and his right not to incriminate himself. Miranda argued that his conviction should be overturned-and the Supreme Court agreed.
Right to Counsel and Privilege against Self-Incrimination: Rights and Liberties under the Law explores the origins, historical development, current status, and future of two rights intended to protect persons accused of crimes. Two shocking case studies-Powell v. Alabama and Brown v. Mississippi-reveal the brutal injustices suffered by Southern blacks in the 1930s and explain how the Supreme Court made landmark decisions to expand the coverage of the right to counsel and the privilege against self-incrimination.
After a brief review of the English and colonial origins of these rights, a careful analysis of each focuses primarily on the revolutionary cases of the 20th century that produced a convergence of these rights in the famous case of Miranda v. Arizona (1966). The work examines subsequent cases and discusses issues that lie ahead, including those related to the war on terror.
Alphabetized set of entries on major personalities such as Joseph McCarthy and judicial decisions such as the Miranda decision and Gideon v. Wainwright.
Annotated bibliography containing a full list of references, including a listing of secondary sources cited throughout the book.
![[PukiWiki]](image/kb_logo.png "[PukiWiki]"){kind=logo}
