Confessions and Admissions: Cases Eroding Miranda (From Briefs of 100 Leading Cases in Law Enforcement, P 149-163, 1991, Rolando V. del Carmen, Jeffery T. Walker -- See NCJ-126275)

• NCJ Number: 126290
• Author(s): R V del Carmen; J T Walker
• Date Published: 1991
• Length: 15 pages
• Sale Source: Anderson Publishing Co
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

Supreme Court decisions concerning confessions and admissions in cases that erode Miranda are analyzed for their significance in law enforcement.

Abstract

In the case South Dakota v. Neville, 459 U.S. 553 (1983), it was found that the admission into evidence of a defendant's refusal to submit to a blood-alcohol test does not violate the suspect's fifth amendment right against self-incrimination. Also, in New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. 649 (1984), the Court found that responses to questions asked by a police officer which are reasonably prompted by concern for public safety are admissible in court even though the suspect was in police custody and was not given the Miranda warnings. According to the case Colorado v. Connelly, 479 U.S. 157 (1986), the admissibility of statements made when the mental state of the defendant interfered with his "rational intellect" and "free will" is governed by State rules of evidence rather than previous Supreme Court decisions regarding coerced confessions and the Miranda waivers.