The Miranda Warning
- This subsection gets into the new rules the Court has established to ensure people's Fifth Amendment rights.
- Warren starts by saying that he hopes this new system will work well, but that it's impossible to know the future. He just hopes that the government will do what it has to do to make sure people's rights are preserved.
- In getting into these new rules (which will be called the Miranda Warning after this case hits the press), Warren starts with the simple statement: If a person in custody is being asked questions, they must first be informed "in clear and unequivocal terms" that they may remain silent.
- That way, some of the psychological pressures of confinement are reduced.
- And, he notes, not everyone may be aware of this right, due to lack of education or recent immigration into the country.
- Next up for the person in custody is the explanation that anything they say "can and will be used against the individual in court" (Opinion.III.5).
- This warning is to let the defendant know the consequences of speaking. Check out Warren's deep concern that people are aware of their rights here: he says that this makes the individual very aware that "he is not in the presence of persons acting solely in his interest" (Opinion.III.5).
- Oh, burn.
- The third part of the Miranda Warning is that the person in custody must be told that he has the right to a lawyer ("counsel" is the word you'll see in the text quite often—it's the same as lawyer or attorney).
- Warren says that the right to silence is not enough; we must also have someone on our side to advise us about when to say something, and when to zip it.
- Check out the other benefit to having a lawyer with you: someone else in the room lowers the chance that something not-so-legal will be done to you (like being burned with cigarette butts). This goes back to Warren's lengthy discussion on the whole "being alone is bad news" issue back in Subsection I.
- Here's a cool quote: "The defendant who does not ask for counsel is the very defendant who most needs counsel" (Opinion.III.10).
- In other words, people who don't know they can have a lawyer are probably unaware of other rights as well, so they really need someone on their side.
- Warren goes into super serious mode here, taking a break to emphasize that all of these rights must be read to anyone in custody before questions. No ifs, ands, or cigarette butts.
- Warren now throws down the last part of the Warning: "The financial ability of the individual has no relationship to the scope of the rights involved here" (Opinion.III.14).
- So, if you can't afford a lawyer, you still get one. A public defender—those overworked, underpaid folks.
- Remember, that last point isn't new. The rule had been in place since Gideon v. Wainwright back in 1963, just a few years before Miranda v. Arizona got to SCOTUS.
- At this point, Warren has finished describing the statements that must be given to anyone prior to questioning.
- He takes a moment to point out that if at any point before or during questioning the defendant wants to remain silent, then the interrogation must end. The same goes for wanting a lawyer—if the defendant asks for one, all questions must stop until one is present.
- So what happens if someone is aware of their rights but doesn't use them?
- Warren tells us next that in such a situation, the police must be able to prove without a doubt that the accused person waived their rights to silence and a lawyer.
- If the police do get a statement or confession from a defendant, before they use that evidence in court they must show proof that the accused was made aware of their rights and chose not to use them.
- If you feel like most of this case has been tough on the police, you're right.
- Warren tries to assure law enforcement that these news rules won't mess with their basic job of investigating crimes.
- He says that this Miranda Warning only needs to be given if a suspect is in custody (not free to leave).
- So, let's say there's a robbery at a gas station and the police are asking people who were there about what happened. Since those people are completely free to leave at any point (they're not under arrest), they don't have to be read their rights.
- Warren ends this subsection with a quick summary of the Miranda Warning.