Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Bargaining About Future Jeopardy, Daniel C. Richman
Bargaining About Future Jeopardy, Daniel C. Richman
Vanderbilt Law Review
The debate about how much protection criminal defendants should have against successive prosecutions has generally been conducted in the context of how to interpret the Double Jeopardy Clause. The doctrinal focus of this debate ignores the fact that for the huge majority of defendants-those who plead guilty instead of standing trial-the Double Jeopardy Clause sin- ply sets a default rule, establishing a minimum level of protection when defendants choose not to bargain about the possibility of future charges. In this Article, Professor Richman examines the world that exists in the shadow of minimalist double jeopardy doctrine, exploring the dynamics of …
New York's Loyalty To The Spirit Of "Miranda": Simply The Best For Twenty-Five Years, Lorraine J. Adler
New York's Loyalty To The Spirit Of "Miranda": Simply The Best For Twenty-Five Years, Lorraine J. Adler
Vanderbilt Law Review
The landmark Supreme Court decision Miranda v. Arizona, recognized a defendant's right to be informed of the rights guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment's self-incrimination clause, including the right to counsel. The Miranda Court realized that a suspect may feel compelled to waive his Fifth Amendment privilege while in official detention. The Court held that the police must read the now-familiar warnings to a subject in custodial interrogation before he can waive his rights. Therefore, the Court in Miranda chose to strike the balance between effective law enforcement and protecting a subject's constitutional rights at the point of informing the subject …
The Right To Counsel During Custodial Interrogation: Equivocal References To An Attorney-Determining What Statements Or Conduct Should Constitute An Accused's Invocation Of The Right To Counsel, Matthew W.D. Bowman
Vanderbilt Law Review
The fifth amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees to all persons the privilege against compelled self-incrimination. In Miranda v. Arizona, the United States Supreme Court interpreted the fifth amendment to require a specified set of procedural safeguards that law enforcement officers must follow to protect adequately each individual's fifth amendment rights. The Miranda safeguards require that prior to an accused's custodial interrogation, government officials must inform the accused that he has the right to remain silent; that any of his statements maybe used against him in a subsequent criminal action; that he has the right to confer with counsel; …