THE CONCEPT AND THE CONTENT OF THE INTERROGATION OF A SUSPECT IN CUSTODY IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDURE IN THE UNITED STATES
THE CONCEPT AND THE CONTENT OF THE INTERROGATION OF A SUSPECT IN CUSTODY IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDURE IN THE UNITED STATES
Author(s): Miodrag N. Simović, Vladimir M. SimovićSubject(s): Law, Constitution, Jurisprudence, Criminal Law, Civil Law, International Law, Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, Court case, Administrative Law
Published by: Правни факултет Универзитета у Бањој Луци
Keywords: Police; the suspect; defense attorney; examination; the Miranda rule;
Summary/Abstract: The paper analyzes some relevant issues related to the actions of law enforcement officers in the USA after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of their liberty, which require that person to be warned of applicable constitutional rights. In the landmark decision Miranda v. Arizona (1966), the US Supreme Court set standards for the rights of law enforcement officers to follow when questioning a suspect in custody. Suspects subject to custodial interrogation must be warned that they have the right to remain silent; that the statements they make may be used as evidence against them; that they have the right to a lawyer; and that if they cannot procure a lawyer, one will be assigned to them before the trial, if they desire it. Under Miranda, if those warnings are not given, evidence obtained during interrogation cannot be used against suspects. Since the Miranda decision, state and federal courts have faced a number of questions regarding its application, including: when a suspect is considered to be in custody and thus entitled to Miranda warnings, and at what point is it considered to be the suspect waived his right to a lawyer during the interrogation. Some US Supreme Court decisions have attempted to answer these difficult questions.
Journal: Годишњак Правног факултета Универзитета у Бањој Луци
- Issue Year: 2018
- Issue No: 40
- Page Range: 11-26
- Page Count: 15
- Language: English
