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. Rhode Island v. Innis - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhode_Island_v._Innis

    Rhode Island v. Innis, 446 U.S. 291 (1980), is a decision by the United States Supreme Court that clarifies what constitutes "interrogation" for the purposes of Miranda warnings. Under Miranda v. Arizona, police are forbidden from interrogating a suspect once he has asserted his right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment.

  5. 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 ...

  6. Supreme Court set to rule on whether Miranda warnings are a ...

    www.aol.com/supreme-court-set-rule-whether...

    For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us

  7. Salinas v. Texas - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salinas_v._Texas

    Salinas v. Texas, 570 US 178 (2013), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, which the court held 5-4 decision, declaring that the Fifth Amendment's self-incrimination clause does not extend to defendants who simply choose to remain silent during questioning, even though no arrest has been made nor the Miranda rights read to a defendant.

  8. 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.

  9. Breaking Down All of Trump’s Day 1 Presidential Actions - AOL

    www.aol.com/breaking-down-trump-day-1-133059861.html

    Trump issued an executive order titled “Ending The Weaponization Of The Federal Government” that directs the Attorney General to “identify and take appropriate action to correct” supposed ...