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. List of landmark court decisions in the United States

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_landmark_court...

    Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) Police must advise criminal suspects of their rights under the Constitution to remain silent, to consult with a lawyer, and to have one appointed to them if they are indigent. A police interrogation must stop if the suspect states that he or she wishes to remain silent.

  4. 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.

  5. 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 ...

  6. Portal:Law/Selected cases/21 - Wikipedia

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

    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.

  7. Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnibus_Crime_Control_and...

    The Supreme Court overturned the Fourth Circuit decision, reaffirming the ruling of Miranda v. Arizona (1966) as the primary guideline for the admissibility of statements made during custodial interrogation, and stating that Congress does not have the legislative power to supersede Miranda v. Arizona.

  8. Arizona’s top court hands victory to backers of open primary push

    www.aol.com/news/arizona-top-court-hands-victory...

    The ballot measure, Proposition 140, would create an open primary system in which registered voters can cast their ballot for… Arizona’s top court hands victory to backers of open primary push ...

  9. 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 ...