NEW YORK v. QUARLES:
safety” exception to
the Miranda rule.
RHODE ISLAND v. INNIS:
Despite Miranda rights
being invoked, confession
was admissible since it
occurred during casual
conversation and not
during an interrogation.
GREENWALD v. WISCONSIN:
Court looked at “totality
of circumstances” of
concluded confession was
LAW DAY 2016
More Than Words
INJUSTICE ANYWHERE IS A THREAT
TO JUSTICE EVERYWHERE.
— Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., letter from
Birmingham Jail (April 16, 1963)
1966 Miranda v. Arizona:
safeguards for interrogation
now know as “Miranda warnings”
DICKERSON v. UNITED STATES:
The Court held that
Congress may not pass
legislation designed to
supersede Miranda since it
is a constitutional rule.
HOWES v. FIELDS:
Miranda does not apply to
interrogations of inmates for
alleged “jailhouse crimes”
OREGON v. MATHIASON:
Miranda rights held
defendant was not
MARYLAND v. SHATZER:
Police may reopen questioning of
a suspect who has invoked Miranda
rights after a break of 14 days.
SALINAS v. TEXAS:
Witness must expressly
invoke Fifth Amendment
rights since said rights
do not extend to those
who simply choose to
• Diminished capacity
• Mental impairment
• Ignorance of the law
WHY DO INNOCENT PEOPLE
1 out of 4 people
BUT LATER EXONERATED BY DNA EVIDENCE MADE A FALSE CONFESSION
OR INCRIMINATING STATEMENT.
The reasons that people falsely confess are
complex and varied, but what they tend to have in
common is a belief that complying with the police
by saying that they committed the crime in
question will be more beneﬁcial than continuing to
maintain their innocence. The factors that can
contribute to a false confession during
a police interrogation include:
In observance of the American Bar Association’s Law Day 2016 and the 50th
anniversary of one of our nation’s best-known U.S. Supreme Court cases,
Miranda v. Arizona, MyCase chronicles the effects of this landmark decision
upon our jurisprudence and constitutional rights:
• Fear of violence
• The actual infliction of harm
• The threat of a harsh sentence
• Misunderstanding the situation
Contributing Causes of
(First 325 DNA exonerations)
Total is more than 100% because wrongful convictions can have more than one cause.
PERCENTAGE OF EXONERATION CASES
Eyewitness Misidentification (235 cases)
Unvalidated / Improper Forensics (154 cases)
False Confessions / Admissions (88 cases)
Informants / Snitches (48 cases)
HAVE EXPOSED OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT AT EVERY
LEVEL AND STAGE OF A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION.
Common forms of
Employing suggestion when conducting
Coercing false confessions
Lying or intentionally misleading
jurors about their observations
Failing to turn over exculpatory
evidence to prosecutors
Providing incentives to secure
unreliable evidence from informants
evidence from defense
mistreating or destroying
Allowing witnesses they
know or should know are not
truthful to testify
witnesses not to testify
Relying on fraudulent
Making misleading arguments
that overstate the
probative value of
of Years Served
Number of DNA
Number of Real
Common forms of misconduct by
You have the right to remain silent.
Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law.
You have the right to talk to a lawyer and have the lawyer present with
you while you are being questioned.
If you cannot afford a lawyer,one will be appointed to represent you
before any questioning if you wish.
You can decide at any time to exercise these rights and not answer any
questions or make any statements.
Do you understand each of these rights as i have explained them to you?
Having these rights in mind, do you wish to talk to us now?
MYCASE IS EASY-TO-USE LAW PRACTICE MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE THAT HELPS YOU MANAGE
CASES, TRACK TIME, INVOICE AND RECEIVE PAYMENTS, AND COMMUNICATE WITH CLIENTS.