The supreme court interpreted the fifth amendment in gideon v. wainwright to mean that accused people have a right to be informed of their rights gideon v. wainwright to mean states must pay for counsel if the defendant cannot afford it miranda v. arizona to mean states must pay for counsel if the defendant cannot afford it miranda v. arizona to mean that accused people have a right to be informed of their rights

I believe the answer is: Miranda v. Arizona to mean that accused people have a right to be informed of their rights

The ruling became a landmark decision which required the police to tell the detainees about their 'miranda rights' when they are being arrested. The right include the right to remain silent and wait for lawyers because everything they say can be used against them on the court,

what precedent do you see the ordinance of 1787 setting for the 1st amendment of the us constitution : )

this person under me, copied me. owo