TITLE

Right Should Remain Silent

AUTHOR(S)
Rosen, Jeffrey
PUB. DATE
May 2000
SOURCE
New Republic;05/01/2000, Vol. 222 Issue 18, p18
SOURCE TYPE
Periodical
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
Advocates a revision of the U.S. Supreme Court criminal procedure decision, Miranda v. Arizona law. Request made by Paul Cassell, a conservative law professor from the University of Utah, to the Supreme Court to overturn the Miranda v. Arizona; Argument that Miranda law protects white collar criminals who are less likely to incriminate themselves without a lawyer; Rationale that the clause hinders police from questioning suspects and thus lead to fewer convictions; View that if Miranda law is abolished by the Supreme Court, an objective standard for determining between coerced and voluntary confessions would be lost.
ACCESSION #
3014773

 

Related Articles

  • Do the Police Have to Take Age and Experience Into Account When Determining Whether a Suspect Is in "Custody" Prior to Questioning? Pro.  // Supreme Court Debates;Apr2004, Vol. 7 Issue 4, p122 

    The question raised in this article is that whether age and experience are relevant additional factors bearing on police custody, with reference to the U.S. Supreme Court Case Miranda v. Arizona. In every interrogation, an officer must think about how his or her actions impact the suspect's...

  • Do the Police Have to Take Age and Experience Into Account When Determining Whether a Suspect Is in "Custody" Prior to Questioning? Con.  // Supreme Court Debates;Apr2004, Vol. 7 Issue 4, p123 

    The question raised in this article is that whether age and experience are relevant additional factors bearing on police custody, with reference to the U.S. Supreme Court Case Miranda v. Arizona. Michael Alvarado, convicted of robbery in the case Michael Yarborough v. Michael Alvarado, argues...

  • Do the Police Have to Take Age and Experience Into Account When Determining Whether a Suspect Is in "Custody" Prior to Questioning? Con. Alvarado, Michael; Allen, Tan K. // Supreme Court Debates;Apr2004, Vol. 7 Issue 4, p111 

    The question raised in this article is that whether age and experience are relevant additional factors bearing on police custody, with reference to the U.S. Supreme Court Case Miranda v. Arizona. The answer is that a juvenile's age and experience are irrelevant for determining "custody, because,...

  • "YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT": A CASE FOR THE USE OF SILENCE AS SUBSTANTIVE PROOF OF THE CRIMINAL DEFENDANT'S GUILT. Romantz, David S. // Indiana Law Review;2005, Vol. 38 Issue 1, p1 

    Examines the use of silence as substantive proof of the criminal defendant's guilt. History and the use of a defendant's silence before the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case Miranda versus Arizona; Discussion of the case's opinion, the rules it announced and the rules it did not announce;...

  • Interrogating Juveniles.  // Supreme Court Debates;Apr2004, Vol. 7 Issue 4, p97 

    The U.S. Supreme Court, in its landmark Miranda v. Arizona case, held that, prior to questioning a suspect in police custody, law enforcement officers must inform the suspect and ensure that he understands, that he has the right to remain silent and that anything he says can and will be used...

  • A Gifted Gadfly.  // Time;11/11/1966, Vol. 88 Issue 20, p89 

    The article features Yale Kamisar, a Michigan law professor who wrote the article "Equal Justice in the Gatehouses and Mansions of American Criminal Procedure," which footnotes the Miranda v. Arizona case. It mentions that Kamisar is considered as the most overpowering and visible criminal-law...

  • 1960-1970 THE UNSETTLED DECADE: 1966 MIRANDA DECISION. Baron, Robert C.; Scinta, Samuel // Millennium 2000 -- 20th Century America: Key Events in History;1996, p87 

    This article deals with the U.S. Supreme Court case Miranda v. State of Arizona in 1966. The alleged criminal had confessed to the crime during a police interrogation. The police, however, had failed to notify him of his right to remain silent, as well as his right to consult with an attorney....

  • Miranda Rights and Police Interrogation.  // Supreme Court Debates;Sep2000, Vol. 3 Issue 6, p161 

    Focuses on the U.S. Supreme Court decision Miranda versus Arizona which held that prior to police interrogation all suspects must be informed of and acknowledge their rights to remain silent. Right of suspects to request a court-appointed lawyer under the Miranda decision; Guidelines presented...

  • Miranda warning survives. Richey, Warren; Axtman, Kris // Christian Science Monitor;6/27/2000, Vol. 92 Issue 151, p1 

    Reports that the United States Supreme Court has upheld the Miranda warning.

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of THE LIBRARY OF VIRGINIA

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics