Final answer:
The Supreme Court threw out Miranda's conviction because his constitutional rights were violated during the interrogation process. The ruling in the Miranda case led to the development of the Miranda Warning, which protects the rights of individuals in police custody.
Step-by-step explanation:
The Supreme Court threw out Miranda's conviction because his constitutional rights were violated during the interrogation process. In the case of Miranda v. Arizona, the Court ruled that the police had failed to inform Miranda of his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and his Sixth Amendment right to an attorney. Therefore, his confession, which was essential evidence in his trial, was deemed inadmissible.
The Court stated that a confession can only be admissible if a suspect is made aware of their rights and voluntarily waives those rights. The ruling in the Miranda case led to the development of the Miranda Warning, which protects the rights of individuals in police custody and requires law enforcement to inform suspects of their rights before questioning them.
It is important to note that while Miranda's conviction was overturned, he was retried and found guilty again based on other evidence, without his confession.