NCJ Number
181987
Journal
Minnesota Law Review Volume: 84 Issue: 2 Dated: December 1999 Pages: 397-472
Date Published
1999
Length
76 pages
Annotation
This article presents the doctrine and data relevant to the ways in which modern interrogators' adaptation to "Miranda" has affected "Miranda's" impact on law enforcement.
Abstract
The authors begin by examining the post-Miranda waiver doctrine and assessing the extent to which the U.S. Supreme Court or lower courts have provided a legal framework that allows the police to use strategies designed to induce waivers of "Miranda" rights. The strategies currently used by interrogators to induce "Miranda" waivers are then considered, based on an examination of numerous interrogations conducted in a wide variety of settings. Next, the authors examine post-Miranda cases that allow the government to impeach a defendant's testimony through the use of evidence obtained through questioning a suspect "outside Miranda." Under these cases, the due process voluntariness test provides the standard for determining the admissibility of statements obtained in violation of "Miranda." Strategies used by interrogators who question suspects "outside Miranda" are then examined. This is followed by an assessment of the effect that abolishing "Miranda" might have on law enforcement and suspects' rights. Overall, the article concludes that police interrogators have refined their interrogation techniques so that, despite the obstacles posed by "Miranda," they are able to obtain admissible statements from defendants. This should be taken into account in determining "Miranda's" future. 329 footnotes