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. Miranda v. Arizona - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_v._Arizona

    Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that law enforcement in the United States must warn a person of their constitutional rights before interrogating them, or else the person's statements cannot be used as evidence at their trial.

  4. 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 ]

  5. Court hears case over deputy who didn't read Miranda rights - AOL

    www.aol.com/news/court-hears-case-over-deputy...

    At issue is whether the familiar Miranda warning, which the court recognized in its Miranda v. Arizona decision in 1966 and reaffirmed 34 years later, is a constitutional right or has a lesser and ...

  6. Ernesto Miranda - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernesto_Miranda

    Despite the printed statement on top of the sheets that Miranda used to write his confession, "with full knowledge of my legal rights," he was not informed of his right to have an attorney present, nor of his right to remain silent when he was arrested or before his interrogation. 73-year-old Alvin Moore was assigned to represent him at his trial.

  7. 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 ...

  8. Bright-line rule - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bright-line_rule

    Miranda v. Arizona (1966) may be considered establishing a bright-line rule. The majority opinion in that case required law enforcement agents to give a criminal suspect what is now known as a Miranda warning of their "Miranda" rights when the suspect is in custody, and when the suspect is about to be interrogated.

  9. Custodial interrogation - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Custodial_interrogation

    Per Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 444 (1966), [1] "custodial interrogation [refers to] questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way." The United States Supreme Court has clarified that a person is being subjected to a ...