Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
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.
[85] [86] If police detain (or arrest) a person, they must advise him or her that he or she has a right to remain silent, and the right to an attorney, among other rights. (This is known as the Miranda warning.) If the detained person invokes these rights, all interrogation must cease, and ordinarily nothing said by the defendant in violation ...
In United States law, an example is the case of Miranda v. Arizona , which adopted a prophylactic rule (" Miranda warnings ") to protect the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. The exclusionary rule , which restricts admissibility of evidence in court, is also sometimes considered to be a prophylactic rule. [ 2 ]
The quack Miranda warning is a term used by skeptics to describe the text which the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA) requires that all labels and marketing materials for products sold as dietary supplements carry, in boldface type: [1] [2] These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration ...
In other projects Wikidata item; ... Pages in category "Miranda warning case law" The following 26 pages are in this category, out of 26 total. ... Text is available ...
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.
1. Ritz Crackers. Wouldn't ya know, a cracker that's all the rage in America is considered an outrage abroad. Ritz crackers are outlawed in several other countries, including the United Kingdom ...
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.