Miranda v.Arizona (384 U.S.436) held that the prosecution's use of statements of an accused, made to police without prior warnings of the person's rights to remain silent, to counsel, and to appointed counsel if indigent, was a violation of the accused's rights contained in

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

Miranda v. Arizona was primarily concerned with the Fifth Amendment's protection against self-incrimination, not specifically mentioned in the options provided. The decision established the requirement for what are now known as Miranda rights, including the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney, which are safeguards against violating the Fifth Amendment's protection against self-incrimination, as well as implicating the Sixth Amendment's right to counsel. However, the correct answer among the provided options, based on the specific rights mentioned in the question, is "None of the above."

Miranda VArizona (384 U