What case involved the issue of not being given a full and effective warning of rights, leading to the establishment of Miranda rights?

The case that established the necessity for law enforcement to inform individuals of their rights, leading to what we know as Miranda rights, is indeed Miranda v. Arizona. This landmark decision emphasized the importance of protecting a suspect's Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination during custodial interrogation. The Supreme Court ruled that individuals must be clearly informed of their rights to remain silent and to have an attorney present. If these rights are not communicated effectively, any statements made during interrogation cannot be used as evidence in court.

In this context, the other cases do not relate to the establishment of Miranda rights. Mapp v. Ohio involves issues of search and seizure and the exclusionary rule. Tinker v. Des Moines pertains to students' rights to free speech in schools, and Obergefell v. Hodges addresses same-sex marriage rights. Each of these cases focuses on different constitutional rights and protections, highlighting the specific importance of the rights established in Miranda v. Arizona regarding custodial interrogation and the necessity of informing suspects of their rights.