Question

The decision in Miranda v. Arizona (1966) more clearly defined what constitutional issue? A) freedom of speech B) applying the death penalty C) right to a jury trial in a civil suit D) right to be represented by an attorney

Answer 1

D because when you are stated your rights on the process of being arrested you have the right to legal counsel aka a lawyer

Answer 2

The correct answer is D. Right to be represented by an attorney

Step-by-step explanation:

Miranda v. Arizona was a case in 1966 in which the Court decided the interrogation of a suspect would only be valid if during the police procedures the individual was informed about his rights, especially the right of being represented and consulting an attorney before being asked any question, otherwise the answers by the suspect would not be valid or used during trial. This means this case defined it was necessary to ensure people who were arrested knew their rights including the right to be represented by an attorney. Thus, the decision Miranda v. Arizona case (1966) more clearly defined the right to be represented by an attorney as this case focused on the right of consulting and being represented by an attorney after being captured in any crime and before being questioned by police.