Shannon Leis is the managing attorney of Imhoff and Associates and your host for today’s show. In this episode we are discussing Miranda warnings. We'll discuss the origination, substance, subsequent decisions, and the future of Miranda.
What you will hear
- Miranda Warnings history and definition
- When the warning must be provided
- Interrogation and evidence of guilt
- The Public Safety Exception
- The Jailhouse Informant Exception
- Violating a right v violating a rule protecting a right
- The future of Miranda warnings
- Alito, Clarence Thomas and stripping protections for the rights and remedies of the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments
Quotes
“Miranda was one of several groundbreaking decisions aimed at protecting the right to the accused handed down by the Warren Court that fundamentally changed criminal procedure.”
“A traffic stop is not considered custody. Police are not required to provide Miranda warnings for an investigative stop and although these warnings are not required, that does not mean anything you say can't be used against you, because it certainly will. So be mindful of your mouth when the officer is asking questions, assume everything you do and say is being recorded and will be used against you.”
“While Miranda remains settled law, the effect of these subsequent decisions prevents Miranda from protecting people from police abuse, especially members of marginalized communities as it was intended to.”
“If you're interrogated in custody without Miranda warnings and make a statement, then testify at trial and give contradictory testimony, the prosecutor can use your statement to impeach the testimony in court.
“It is now irrelevant whether a suspect was cognitively or mentally impaired at the time, they waived their rights as long as police coercion is not involved.”
“To exercise your right to remain silent, you are required to speak…..So you need to invoke your right to remain silent in order to prevent your silence from being used against you.”
“No one should ever speak to law enforcement without a lawyer. They are not there to help you despite what they might claim. They can lie to you. They can trick you. Do not speak to law enforcement without a lawyer.”
“False confessions of people proven factually innocent by DNA account for 29% of wrongful convictions.”
“Miranda is important and necessary. It should be built upon and strengthened, not weakened.”
Mentioned
Arizona v Miranda 1966
Warren Court
Gideon v Wainwright
Harry v New York 1971
Rhode Island v Innis 1980
New York v Quarles 1984
Illinois v Perkins 1990
Marilyn v Shatzer 2010
Berghuis v Thompkins 2010
Salinas v Texas 2013
Vega v Tico 2022
Dickerson v United States
Map v Ohio
Imhoff and Associates
California Penal Code 4.22
If you enjoyed this episode of Off The Record Podcast, make sure to subscribe and drop us a five-star review.