June 13 - Miranda v. Arizona: The Supreme Court of the United States rules that the police must inform suspects of their rights before questioning them.
While major rulings like Miranda v. Arizona (which requires the police to inform suspects of their rights) still stand, the justices have narrowed their application.
If there was an unanticipated moment in today's hearing, it was Judge Sessions's comments on the Miranda rule, the Supreme Court decision requiring the police to inform criminal suspects of their legal rights.
The decision, Miranda v. Arizona, requires the police to inform criminal suspects of their legal rights.
That decision required police officers to inform arrested suspects of their rights to remain silent and to have a lawyer present, and barred questioning once such a suspect has requested a lawyer.
Miranda v. Arizona (1966) held that the police must inform suspects of their rights (including the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney) before being interrogated.
Judge Souter responded with a long defense of those rulings, particularly the landmark Miranda decision, which requires the police to inform criminal suspects of their rights.
Before custodial interrogations, police are required to give suspects a Miranda warning that informs suspects of their legal rights during interrogation.
The authorities are required to inform suspects of their rights.
Laws requiring court orders to hold subjects for more than three days and requiring authorities to inform suspects of the charges against them are generally followed.