Miranda V. Arizona (1966)

    In 1966 Ernesto Miranda was arrested after a crime victim identified him linking him to the kidnapping and rape of an 18-year-old woman 10 days earlier. Upon arrest the police officers questioning him did not inform him of his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, or of his Sixth Amendment right to the assistance of an attorney. While being interrogated Miranda signed a confession to the kidnap and rape of this 18-year-old. During his trial, his attorney argued that his confession should have been excluded from trial because he was not made aware of his rights. This case quickly moved to the Supreme Court, where The Supreme Court agreed with Ernesto Miranda's lawyer, deciding that the police had not taken proper steps to inform Miranda of his rights. 

    I agree with their decision, although the outcome could be unjust, the Supreme Court needs to stick to the Constitution when deciding these cases because America is a nation built on laws, and had they ruled against Miranda, that would jeopardize the strength of the fifth and sixth amendment.

   This is quite possibly one of the biggest landmark cases in American history.  It changed law enforcement across the nation's common procedure of arresting criminals, and now the arresting officers always have to recite "You have the right to remain silent.  Anything you say will be used against you in a court of law.  You have the right to an attorney during interrogation; if you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed to you."