英文字典中文字典


英文字典中文字典51ZiDian.com



中文字典辞典   英文字典 a   b   c   d   e   f   g   h   i   j   k   l   m   n   o   p   q   r   s   t   u   v   w   x   y   z       







请输入英文单字，中文词皆可：

untrammeled    音标拼音: [əntr'æməld]
a. 未上枷锁的;自由的

安装中文字典英文字典查询工具!


中文字典英文字典工具:
选择颜色:
输入中英文单字

































































英文字典中文字典相关资料:


  • Facts and Case Summary - Miranda v. Arizona - United States Courts
    In this case, the Supreme Court was asked to decide if the age of a juvenile being questioned by police should be taken into consideration when deciding if he or she is in police custody and, therefore, entitled to a Miranda warning
  • Miranda v. Arizona - Wikipedia
    Because of the defendant's low I Q and poor English-language skills, the U S Court of Appeals ruled that it was a "clear error" when the district court found that Garibay had "knowingly and intelligently waived his Miranda rights "
  • Miranda v. Arizona | Constitution Center
    Miranda’s oral and written confessions are now held inadmissible under the Court’s new rules One is entitled to feel astonished that the Constitution can be read to produce this result
  • Miranda v. Arizona Summary: The Case That Changed Policing
    Miranda v Arizona, decided by the Supreme Court in 1966, established that police must inform suspects of specific constitutional rights before conducting a custodial interrogation The 5-4 ruling in 384 U S 436 created what are now universally known as “Miranda rights,” reshaping how every law enforcement agency in the country handles arrests and questioning The decision grew out of a
  • Miranda v. Arizona Case Summary: Ruling and Rights
    Learn how Miranda v Arizona came about, what the Supreme Court actually decided, and how those familiar warnings hold up — and fall short — in practice today
  • Overview - Miranda v. Arizona: The Rights to Justice (March 13, 1963 . . .
    The decision that gave rise to the Miranda warning and the verb “Mirandize” was preserved in the U S law that followed the Supreme Court’s ruling, which found that the Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights of Ernesto Arturo Miranda were violated at the moment of his arrest and trial
  • 1966: Miranda v. Arizona - A Latinx Resource Guide: Civil Rights Cases . . .
    In a 5-4 Supreme Court decision Miranda v Arizona (1966) ruled that an arrested individual is entitled to rights against self-incrimination and to an attorney under the 5th and 6th Amendments of the United States Constitution
  • Miranda v. Arizona | Definition, Background, Facts | Britannica
    The 1966 Miranda v Arizona Supreme Court case established guidelines for police interrogations of suspects in custody The Court ruled that Ernesto Miranda's confession for kidnapping and rape was inadmissible as evidence because he wasn't informed of his rights
  • Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436 (1966) - Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center
    Miranda v Arizona: Under the Fifth Amendment, any statements that a defendant in custody makes during an interrogation are admissible as evidence at a criminal trial only if law enforcement told the defendant of the right to remain silent and the right to speak with an attorney before the interrogation started, and the rights were either exercised or waived in a knowing, voluntary, and
  • Miranda v. Arizona (1966): The Miranda Rights Case | LawLion
    Miranda v Arizona (1966) case brief Learn who Ernesto Miranda was, what the Miranda warning says, why Chief Justice Warren's 5-4 ruling





中文字典-英文字典  2005-2009