enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Miranda warning - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_warning

    In the United States, the Miranda warning is a type of notification customarily given by police to criminal suspects in police custody (or in a custodial interrogation) advising them of their right to silence and, in effect, protection from self-incrimination; that is, their right to refuse to answer questions or provide information to law enforcement or other officials.

  3. Prophylactic rule - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophylactic_rule

    In United States law, an example is the case of Miranda v. Arizona , which adopted a prophylactic rule (" Miranda warnings ") to protect the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. The exclusionary rule , which restricts admissibility of evidence in court, is also sometimes considered to be a prophylactic rule. [ 2 ]

  4. Dickerson v. United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dickerson_v._United_States

    Case history; Prior: United States v. Dickerson, 971 F. Supp. 1023 (E.D. Va. 1997); reversed, 166 F.3d 667 (4th Cir. 1999).: Holding; The mandate of Miranda v.Arizona that a criminal suspect be advised of certain constitutional rights governs the admissibility at trial of the suspect's statements, not the requirement of 18 U.S.C. § 3501 that such statements simply be voluntarily given.

  5. Illinois v. Perkins - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois_v._Perkins

    Illinois v. Perkins, 496 U.S. 292 (1990), [1] was a decision by the United States Supreme Court that held that undercover police agents did not need to give Miranda warnings when talking to suspects in jail. [2] Miranda warnings, named after the 1966 Supreme Court case Miranda v.

  6. Supreme Court Rules Miranda Rights to be Limited ... - AOL

    www.aol.com/news/supreme-court-rules-miranda...

    On Thursday, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Carlos Vega v. Terence B. Tekoh that a plaintiff may not sue a police officer for obtaining an improper admission of an “un-Mirandized ...

  7. Stop Misleading Juveniles About Their 'Miranda' Rights - AOL

    www.aol.com/news/stop-misleading-juveniles...

    Given the inherent differences between juveniles and adults and the differences between an adjudication of delinquency and a criminal conviction, basic fairness dictates that there should be an ...

  8. Chavez v. Martinez - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chavez_v._Martinez

    Chavez v. Martinez, 538 U.S. 760 (2003), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court, which held that a police officer does not deprive a suspect of constitutional rights by failing to issue a Miranda warning. However, the court held open the possibility that the right to substantive due process could be violated in certain egregious ...

  9. Vega v. Tekoh - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vega_v._Tekoh

    In the United States, Miranda warnings were established from the Supreme Court case Miranda v. Arizona and upheld in Dickerson v. United States, establishing that under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, statements made by a suspect while both in police custody and directly being questioned cannot be used as evidence in trial unless they were notified of their rights to ...