enow.com Web Search

  1. Ad

    related to: miranda v arizona case brief reasoning questions

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. Portal:Law/Selected cases/21 - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Law/Selected_cases/21

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

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

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

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

  6. 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 ...

  7. Brewer v. Williams - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brewer_v._Williams

    Brewer v. Williams, 430 U.S. 387 (1977), is a decision by the United States Supreme Court that clarifies what constitutes "waiver" of the right to counsel for the purposes of the Sixth Amendment. Under Miranda v. Arizona, evidence obtained by police during interrogation of a suspect before he has been read his Miranda rights is inadmissible. [1]

  8. California v. Prysock - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_v._Prysock

    In a 6-3 per curiam decision, the Court ruled that Prysock's rights were adequately conveyed and that Miranda v.Arizona did not require a "talismanic incantation." [2]In a dissent authored by Justice John P. Stevens, he argued that Sergeant Byrd left out crucial information that Prysock had the right to the services of an attorney regardless of his parent's willingness to hire one.

  9. What You Didn't Learn In Sex Ed

    projects.huffingtonpost.com/cliteracy/education?...

    From ancient history to the modern day, the clitoris has been discredited, dismissed and deleted -- and women's pleasure has often been left out of the conversation entirely. Now, an underground art movement led by artist Sophia Wallace is emerging across the globe to challenge the lies, question the myths and rewrite the rules around sex and the female body.

  1. Ad

    related to: miranda v arizona case brief reasoning questions