how did the supreme court decision in miranda v arizona affect the rights of the accused? with specific details.

The correct answer to this question is the following.

Although there are no options attached we can say the following.

The Supreme Court decision in Miranda v Arizona affected the rights of the accused in that the Supreme Court overturned the conviction of Ernesto Miranda in that case because the Court ruled that people "that are under arrest must be read their rights by law enforcement."

We are talking about the Supreme Case in which the Warren Court dealt with the rights of the accused Ernesto Miranda.

Miranda v. Arizona was a case decided by the Warren court on June 13, 1966. Ernesto Miranda had a written confession for kidnap and r*pe, but the issue was that police interrogated him without the presence of a lawyer, neither the police officers told him he had the right to call a lawyer.

The Court's decision favored Miranda, overturned his conviction and the case was sent to Arizona for retrial.

overtime, the civil rights movement changed in a way that not only it benefited african-americans, but benefited other ethnicity's such as latinos, asians, or women too! that's why the results of the movement be called mixed.

the civil rights movement brought about tremendous changes. no longer were blacks denied the right to vote, to eat, shop, and swim where they , and more importantly, to attend integrated schools. despite its many accomplishments, however, the civil rights movement had its shortcomings. for example, many people, both young and old, lost their lives, homes, jobs, and families. still other individuals were so damaged by psychological trauma that they ceased being productive members of the community. the movement left intact the economic inequities that had contributed to the maintenance of segregation. and finally, racism remained alive and well long after the movement's end. like most movements of its kind, the civil rights movement left behind a mixed legacy of triumph and tragedy.

no it wouldn't because yellow journalism would exaggerate in everything.