An example of the format to use for the 

Written Research Paper Outline


SF 462-01


Miranda v. Arizona 384 U.S. 436

Background: On March 13,1963, Ernesto Miranda was arrested based on circumstantial evidence linking him to the kidnapping and rape of an 18-year-old woman. After hours of interrogation by Phoenix Police Department Officers, Miranda signed a confession to the rape that included a statement that the he under no coercion, threats and in full knowledge of his rights.

Before the Trial it was confirmed that Miranda had not been informed of his right to counsel or that his confession would be used against him in a court of Law. At Trial, his Court-appointed lawyer, Alvin Moore objected to the use of the confession based on these facts. When his objection was overruled in the trial court, Miranda was convicted of rape and kidnapping. He was then sentenced to 20-30 years’ imprisonment. Moore appealed the case to the Arizona Supreme Court which affirmed the trial court’s decision to use the confession as evidence. In 1965, the case was granted Cert by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Issues, Rules of Law, Application: This case brought into question the manners in which police interrogations were conducted at the time, which many considered to be barbaric and unjust. The issues that were emphasized were that any statements made by a defendant in police custody must be admissible at trial only if prosecution can show that the defendant was informed of their rights to an attorney before and during questioning and against self-incrimination. Not only that they understood their rights, but voluntarily waived them.

Conclusion: Chief Justice Earl Warren delivered the opinion of the Court, ruling that due to the coercive nature of the of police interrogations, no confessions could be admissible under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments unless the suspect was aware of their rights and waived them. One Justice concurred in part and dissented in part. Three others dissented, four other concurred.   (Need to explain both the majority and dissenting opinion)

Opinions: Students Opinions and Audience Questions (just indicate which student will defend opinions) I will  defend the dissenting decision and support that opinion . 


LexisNexis, Miranda v. Arizona 384 U.S. 436

Charles W. Stephanos B, (2010) The right to remain silent. Retrieved from

Lief, M. and Caldwell H. (2006) You have the right to remain silent. American Heritage.

Montaldo, C. (2014) Miranda Rights and Warning: Landmark Case Evolved from 1963 Ernesto Miranda Arrest. Retrieved from (Not a valid resource)

Miranda v. Arizona 384 U.S. 436 (1966) Justia U.S. Supreme Court. Retrieved from