Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Against Orthodoxy: Miranda Is Not Prophylactic And The Constitution Is Not Perfect, Lawrence Rosenthal
Against Orthodoxy: Miranda Is Not Prophylactic And The Constitution Is Not Perfect, Lawrence Rosenthal
Lawrence Rosenthal
In the four decades since the decision in Miranda v. Arizona, two point of consensus have emerged about that decision. The first area of agreement is that Miranda’s rationale for requiring its now-famous warnings is wrong, or at least dramatically overstated. In Michigan v. Tucker, the Court first labeled Miranda warnings as “prophylactic standards.” For their part, Miranda’s advocates do not spend much time defending its conception of unwarned custodial interrogation as inherently coercive. The second point of agreement is that Miranda has turned out to be a failure combating the coercive nature of custodial interrogation. Despite Miranda, coerced confessions …
Symposium Introduction -- Miranda At 40: Applications In A Post-Enron, Post-9/11 World, Donald J. Kochan
Symposium Introduction -- Miranda At 40: Applications In A Post-Enron, Post-9/11 World, Donald J. Kochan
Donald J. Kochan
The groundbreaking case of Miranda v. Arizona raise[d] questions which go to the roots of our concepts of American criminal jurisprudence: the restraints society must observe consistent with the Federal Constitution in prosecuting individuals for crime. This Introduction to the 2007 Chapman Law Review Symposium summarizes the contemporary examination of Miranda's influence, past and present, along with the continuing debate today. The experiences and precedents that have evolved in the past 40 years helps to explore the evolution of the criminal law and procedural dictates set forth in Miranda. Complications with custodial interrogation - and the impulses and incentives involved …