Miranda Flashcards
What is the purpose of Miranda?
Miranda is a prophylactic rule which requires courts in criminal cases to exclude self-incriminating statements elicited from a suspect during custodial interrogation unless the suspect knowingly and voluntarily waives her 5th Amdt privilege against self-incrimination.
What are the 4 Miranda rights?
right to remain silent; anything you say can be used against you in court; right to counsel; right to have counsel appointed if necessary
How are Miranda rights read?
in a language you understand, and you must be of sound mind
What is the purpose behind right to remain silent?
directly required to secure 5th amendment prohibition of compelled self incrimination
What is the purpose behind right to counsel?
constitutional prophylactic and secondary riht which protects right to remain silent which protects 5th amendment right against self icrimination
What happens if Miranda rights not read?
anything incriminating will be inadmissible
What happens if you invoke your right to remain silent?
police must immediately stop interrogation
What happens if you invoke your right to an attorney?
police must immediately stop interrogation; and cannot re-interrogate until an attorney has been provided and that attorney is present
What triggers Miranda?
Custodial Interrogation
Define Custody
being under arrest or the functional equivalent thereof (Berkemer or Mathiason) Functional equivalent is when freedom of movement is impaired for a significant period of time such that it appears to a RPP being detained that she is arrested. Custody begins at arrest. Custody is more than a 4th amdt. seizure
Define Interrogation
express questioning (inquiries directed at you in the form of a direct question) or its functional equivalent - words or actions on the part of police that a RP officer would foresee would be reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response (Ennis)
What are the 4 exceptions to Miranda?
Harris - impeachment of D’s credibility
Perkins - undercover officer exception
Muniz - routine booking question exception
Quarles - public safety exception
Purpose of Miranda to an arrestee?
To show them that interrogators are prepared to honor their constitutional rights
Duckworth
Miranda need not be word for word so long as substantive meaning is there. Quack!
Spring
suspect’s awareness of all possible subjects of questionin in advance of interrogation is not relevant (can SPRING any subject on ya)
Berkermer v McCarthy
Routine traffic stop was not custodial interrogation.
No arrest, b/c arrest = procedural aspects ex. cuffed and booked
This case defines custody - arrest or functional equivalent thereof.
(Jenny McCarthy can stop traffic)
Mathiason
even police station questioning designed to produce incriminating statement is not necessarily custodial interrogation
particularly when you voluntarily go to station or voluntarily start talking
(something about Math?)
Innis
F - Officer transporting murder suspect to jail told accompanying officer that he hopes the gun was found b/c danger to nearby handicapped children. Upon hearing this, he fessed up
R - Defines Interrogation as express questioning or its functional equivalent.
C - here not CI b/c not likely to elicit an incriminating response
(Innis and interrogation both start with In)
Mauro
F - killed son and asked to talk to wife
R - 3P conversation not the functional equivalent of interrogation b/c in presence of police officer and tape recorder
(Mauro Costa would want to talk to his wife too)
Perkins
placed informant and snitch in cellblock and Perkins sung like a canary.
This is either undercover officer exception or not custodial interrogation b/c no coercion.
Ernie Perkins is a snitch.
Muniz
Arrested for DUI - standard booking questions admissible, but 6th birthday question not admissible b/c testimonial.
Exception for routing booking questions b/administrative in nature
6Bay is testimonial
Testimonial v Non-testimonial evidence
Testimonial - spoken words. 5th Amendment protections only apply to testimonial evidence. Non-testimonial evidence such as stumbling or slurring not protected by 5th Amendment. (Muniz)
Quarles
public safety exception. Woman raped and said rapist entered store with gun. Found man w/out gun. Gun recovered b/f Miranda rights.
Exception applies when officers ask questions reasonably prompted by a desire to quell an imminent threat to public safety.
(if the gun is not found, someone might quarrel about it)
Butler
D robbed & murdered gas station attendant an refused to sign waiver. Waiver must be knowing & voluntary under TOC. mere silence is not enough but silence, coupled with understanding of rights and conduct indicatig waiver, may support conclusion that D waived his rights
(Note: best practices is to ask if person understands)
Fare
Parole Officcer is not equivalent of asking for lawyer.
This is not FARE
Can police continue or resume questioning once D has asserted right to remain silent but not right to atty?
Must immediately terminate interrogation
Must suspend questioning entirely for a significant period of time
must give fresh set of Miranda warnings at outset of additional interrogation
Edwards
when suspect invokes right to counsel, police CANNOT interrogate again until counsel is made available (unless he voluntarily initiates further communication)
Roberson
Bright line rule – once suspect asserts Miranda-Edwards right to counsel, cannot initiate ANY further interrogation about ANY subject (including other crimes)
(can’t talk about Robinsomeone or anything else)
Minnick
once right to counsel invoked, counsel must be PRESENT for all interrogations
Bradshaw
when right to counsel invoked, person himself can reinitiate conversation and statements will be admissible (Bradshaw like Dan Bradley - reinitiate conversations)
Davis
invocation of Edwards must be unambiguous to RPP
Like guy Davis - unambiguous
Moran
sister tried to get atty for him but police did not tell him.
atty/client relationship is between D and atty, not a 3rd party. Events that occur outside knowledge of D cannot affect his constitutional rights. Right to atty cannot be invoked by 3rd party.
(officer acted like a MORON)
Estelle
Judge ordered psychiatric exam to determine competence to stand trial then used later at death penalty hearing.
5th amdt protects D from being made the “deluded instrument of his own execution”
