Criminal Procedure I

No Thumbnail Available
Authors
Burns, Tim
Issue Date
1983
Type
Journal Article
Language
Keywords
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
Alternative Title
Abstract
INTRODUCTION|In Miranda v. Arizona, the United States Supreme Court observed that custodial interrogation contains "inherently compelling pressures" which undermine the individual's will and which may force the individual to speak when the individual would not do so otherwise. In these situations, the individual's privilege against self-incrimination is jeopardized. Therefore, the Court held that in order to safeguard the individual's fifth amendment rights, the accused, prior to any custodial interrogation, must be warned of the constitutional right to remain silent, the right to counsel, and the right to have counsel present during interrogation. However, the Miranda decision noted that the suspect may waive these rights provided the waiver is knowingly and intelligently made. The "heavy burden" of demonstrating that the waiver was intelligent rests on the prosecution. Thus, in order for the government to admit a statement made during a custodial interrogation, the suspect must have been warned of the constitutional rights as set out in Miranda and have knowingly and intelligently waived those rights...
Description
Citation
16 Creighton L. Rev. 1045 (1982-1983)
Publisher
Creighton University School of Law
License
Journal
Volume
Issue
PubMed ID
DOI
ISSN
EISSN