How might knowledge of these rights have changed what Ernesto Miranda did when the police questioned him?

google: individual rights must be balanced against the values of society at large. For instance, the right to free speech must be balanced against our desire for an orderly society.

Me: In Miranda v. Arizona (1966), the Supreme Court ruled that detained criminal suspects, prior to police questioning, must be informed of their constitutional right to an attorney and against self-incrimination ... The court disagreed, however, and upheld the conviction.

I'm assuming you're talking about the Miranda rights.

He wouldn't have spoken to them without a lawyer present. He wouldn't have had to answer any of their questions. He would've just kept his mouth shut.