Which of the following best describes the Miranda v. Arizona case and its significance?
Miranda v. Arizona was about being wrongly identified by an accuser. The case helped create a rule that more than an accuser's identification was needed for an arrest.
Miranda v. Arizona was about confessing without an attorney present. The case helped create a rule that an attorney must be present for suspects being questioned by police.
Miranda v. Arizona was about protecting a person's 5th and 6th Amendment rights. The ruling gave police the burden of reminding citizens of their rights when arrested.
Miranda v. Arizona was about a signed confession obtained by conspiracy between police and Miranda's attorney. The judge ruled that attorneys must be self or court appointed.