enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. New York v. Quarles - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_v._Quarles

    Case history; Prior: Certiorari to the Court of Appeals of New York: Holding; Concern for public safety must be paramount to adherence to the literal language of the prophylactic rules enunciated in Miranda. Court membership; Chief Justice Warren E. Burger Associate Justices William J. Brennan Jr. · Byron White Thurgood Marshall · Harry Blackmun

  5. Ernesto Miranda - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernesto_Miranda

    Ernesto Arturo Miranda (March 9, 1941 – January 31, 1976) was an American laborer whose criminal conviction was set aside in the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case Miranda v. Arizona , which ruled that criminal suspects must be informed of their right against self-incrimination and their right to consult with an attorney before being questioned ...

  6. Warren Court - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Court

    The famous case of Miranda v. Arizona (1966) summed up Warren's philosophy. [33] Everyone, even one accused of crimes, still enjoyed constitutionally protected rights, and the police had to respect those rights and issue a specific warning when making an arrest. Warren did not believe in coddling criminals; thus in Terry v.

  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. Rhode Island v. Innis - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhode_Island_v._Innis

    Case history; Prior: Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Rhode Island: Holding; Interrogation under Miranda is defined as any words or actions on the part of the police that the police should know are reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response. Court membership; Chief Justice Warren E. Burger Associate Justices William J. Brennan Jr ...

  9. Category:Miranda warning case law - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Miranda_warning...

    Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us