Miranda Warnings

Improved Essays
"You are under arrest. You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You also have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided to you.” These words sound familiar, right? If you have ever watched a television show where someone has being arrested for a crime, then you have more than likely heard these words. This is one of the most frequent and a widespread statement that is said throughout law enforcement. These types of statements are called minimum required Miranda warnings (Worrall, 2017). Miranda warnings originated from the highly significant case, Miranda v. Arizona, (384 U.S. 436 [1966]. In this ruling, the Miranda rule was acknowledged …show more content…
There are two requirements, needed for Miranda to apply. The first requirement needed for Miranda to apply is custody. Custody can be defined as the apprehension or detainment of an individual by law enforcement in which the individual has been dispossessed of their free will. For instance, a custodial situation such as an individual being questioned in their home can arise to the level of custody (Worrall, 2017). In the case of Orozco v. Texas (394 U.S. 324 [1969]), the Supreme Court decided that custody existed when a man was awaken in his home by several police officers for questioning and was not free to go. Furthermore, custody is not sufficient enough by itself for Miranda to apply. The second requirement is interrogation. Interrogation as defined by Miranda is questioning initiated by law enforcement officers (Worrall, 2017). For example, if a suspect is placed in custody and brought in for questioning, a series of “guilt-seeking” questions are asked with the intent to elicit a response (Worrall, 2017). Interrogation is not the same as general questioning when a crime has taken place. The two requirements combined equate to custodial interrogation and when neither custody nor interrogation occurs, Miranda does not …show more content…
In the event that the safety of the public is at risk or in danger, no Miranda warnings are required – at least in the short term (Worrall, 2017). This is also known as the exception to the Miranda rule and was a very controversial issue. With attention to a landmark case New York v. Quarles (467 U.S. 649 [1984]), several police officers entered a supermarket after receiving information that a man with a gun (Quarles) had entered the supermarket. The officers located the man (later identified as Quarles) and ordered him to stop and put his hands above his head. The man was then frisked and a gun holster was found on him. The officers questioned the man about the whereabouts of the gun, which he gave the information on where the gun was located. He was then arrested and read his Miranda warnings. In this case the court decided that the Miranda warnings need not be given if the safety of the public is endangered (Worrall, 2017). However, it must first be determined by the appropriate test if threat to public safety exists. This test is called the objective test. An objective test is one based on what a reasonable person, in the same circumstances would

Related Documents

  • Great Essays

    During the time of the debate on Miranda rules police officers are put in an…

    • 2625 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Miranda Vs Arizona Essay

    • 950 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The right to remain silent is located in Fifth Amendment, and the right to have a presence of attorney is located in the Sixth Amendment of the constitution. The Supreme Court ended up ruling that it was unconstitutional to undertake the interrogation without the warning of the rights secured by the Fifth Amendment. Additionally, the court stated that they must protect the individual from the desire to self-incriminate ("Miranda v."). The court created the Miranda Warning which is as follows: "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law.…

    • 950 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Your miranda rights can hurt your case but they can also help. Ernesto Arturo Miranda March 9, 1941 January 31, 1976 was a laborer whose conviction on…

    • 491 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Great Essays

    However, this only applies when the suspect is in custody. According to GetLegal.com, if both elements are not present, the police are not required to give Miranda warnings. Many landmark cases have addressed and debated over what the true meaning of "custody" and "interrogation," however the main definition to go by is that custody means to be arrested. Therefore, the standard a court will apply is objective as they give a fair choice, where they will ask whether the average person is aware of the circumstances and of their rights but would have felt free to leave the scene and remain silent. If the answer is no, the suspect is put in…

    • 1242 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Since Miranda v. Arizona (1956) the Supreme Court watered down the protection of suspects during interrogation in several ways. The Miranda warnings weakened when courts decided they were not Fifth Amendment rights (Hemmens, 2014). Miranda warnings weakened when Courts ruled that police violations are inadmissible and does not apply to evidence obtained through Miranda violated interrogations. In addition, the courts ruled that not all parts of the Miranda warnings need to be read to suspects. One of the most damaging Miranda warnings were weakened when courts decided that if a confession was made through an interrogation that violated Miranda rules, the confession is admissible once the suspect Miranda rights were properly read (Hemmens, 2014, p. 28).…

    • 396 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Miranda Vs Arizona Essay

    • 594 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The ruling of the Supreme Court case of Miranda v. Arizona helped justify the full knowledge of legal and citizen rights that a defendant has in court. The case aided both the detained suspects and police officers/suspects with the defendants being aware of what rights they have while their under custody while legal authority knew and recited what they have to say to an individual that place in…

    • 594 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Miranda Warning is designed to inform anyone in police custody the right to due process by adhering to the Fifth Amendment. Certain protocols and formality must be followed by implementing four things before conducting an interrogation. The defendant must first be informed that they have the right to remain silent (Hall, 2015). Secondly, they must be informed that anything they say can and will be used against them in a court of law (Hall, 2015). They should also be informed that they have a right to receive legal advice (Hall, 2015).…

    • 271 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Television shows and movies have depicted the scenario where a suspect is arrested and read their Miranda rights. The process of reading a suspect their rights appears to be critical before a suspect is handcuffed and placed into police custody. The podcast entitled Miranda v Arizona by the author South East Texas CJ (2015) highlights why reading suspects their rights is so important. Miranda V Arizona was a case involving a female victim who was restrained, kidnapped, and raped in the year of 1963 in Phoenix Arizona. The woman was released near her home.…

    • 292 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    When is it required for the officers to tell you, or read to you the miranda rights? Whenever the person is in custody of that said officer, when they are accused of said crime, or criminal activity. What does it mean when said officer says, "Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law."? It means watch what you say, it can be held against you during…

    • 513 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Before June 13th 1966, police questioning of suspects in custody was covered by the "voluntariness" doctrine. Under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution, courts would admit a defendant 's confession into evidence if it was voluntary, but excluded any involuntary confession.3 The law curtailed police misconduct in securing confessions and exemplifies judicial activism. Yet many dare to question the impacts made by the Miranda Warning asking ‘Is it truly effective? Does is actually bring positive effects to law enforcement or make it easier for dangerous criminals to be let free?’…

    • 1901 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Upon their arrival the suspect, John Smith, has been already under arrest for the robbery and the shooting of a guard. Smith is arrested and placed into police custody, during the ride back to the station Smith says, “I am so sorry, I shot him!” Smith’s statement would be admissible in court because while he was being arrested, he was not being interrogated because he was sitting in the back of a police cruiser. The requirement for Miranda Rights is they must be given before and pertinent questioning or interrogation of the suspect is started Miranda v. Arizona. (n.d.).…

    • 690 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    According to Memphis criminal attorney J. Jeffrey Lee, if police fail to read a Miranda warning to a person in custody being questioned, the police cannot use self-incriminating information obtained from the person. Cornell University's Legal Information Institute notes that this is part of the Exclusionary Rule. The purpose of the Miranda warning is to protect the Fifth Amendment rights of a person in police custody from coercive police interrogation explains Carl A. Benoit, J.D.…

    • 276 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    There area series of policies that we need to follow in order to make an arrest. We need to follow the legal procedures in order to be able to arrest someone and take their freedom away from them. People have the right to just walk away from us if they don’t want to talk to us if they haven’t created a crime. In other words if we just randomly walk up to someone they don’t have to stay and talk to us. Miranda VS.…

    • 310 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The consequences for not following the requirements of Miranda warnings can be severe. If an officer fails to read a defendant his or her rights before obtaining a confession when it was required under Miranda, any statements will not be allowed in court and cannot be used against the defendant (Hall, 2014). However, any statements made in violations of defendant’s Miranda rights can be used to impeach that person at trial if their testimony contradicts the illegally obtained statements (Hall, 2014). The U.S. Supreme Court has also ruled that physical fruits of the crime from Miranda violations are admissible in court (Hall, 2014).…

    • 208 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The police question suspects and witnesses for two reasons, to gather information about the crime and to try to get a suspect to confess if they believe the individual is guilty. This is where Miranda rights are important. The Constitution guarantees certain rights including the following. The right to remain silent and the right to have an attorney, either one that is appointed by the state or one that is privately hired. To start with the first line of the Miranda statement “You have the right to remain silent”.…

    • 1883 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays