Also known as: Miranda right · Miranda warning · Miranda warnings · Miranda rule · Miranda
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
Constitutional warnings that law enforcement officers must give to a suspect in custody before interrogation. The warnings advise the suspect of the right to remain silent, that any statement can be used against the suspect in court, the right to an attorney, and the right to appointed counsel if the suspect cannot afford one. Failure to administer the warnings renders any resulting statements inadmissible in the prosecution's case in chief.
Mohan Malhotra was arrested and invoked his right to counsel during questioning. Officers stopped the interrogation and left the room. Two hours later the same officers returned without providing counsel and resumed questioning about the same offense. Malhotra then made incriminating statements that the prosecution sought to introduce at trial.
Mason McCarthy was taken into custody at a police station and questioned about a robbery without receiving any warnings. He confessed after thirty minutes of interrogation. The prosecution attempted to introduce the confession as part of its case in chief.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Matthew Martinez gave statements during custodial questioning conducted without Miranda warnings. The statements were suppressed from the prosecution's case in chief. At trial Martinez testified inconsistently with those statements, and the prosecution sought to use the earlier statements solely to impeach his credibility.
Malcolm McKinley was arrested for driving under the influence. Officers directed a physician to draw his blood without giving Miranda warnings. The blood analysis was offered at trial to prove intoxication.
Meredith Maxwell testified before a grand jury under subpoena and gave false statements. She had not received Miranda warnings before testifying. The government later prosecuted her for perjury based on that testimony.
Mina Mehta was in custody and invoked her right to counsel. Officers ceased questioning. Mehta later initiated further conversation with officers and made voluntary statements without counsel present. The prosecution offered those statements at trial.
Police must cease interrogation immediately. They may not reinitiate questioning about any offense until counsel is provided or the suspect initiates further communication and validly waives the right.
Supporting sources
No. A witness before a grand jury has no right to counsel in the grand jury room and may be prosecuted for perjury even without receiving Miranda warnings.
Supporting sources
Statements obtained without Miranda warnings are inadmissible in the prosecution's case in chief. They may still be used to impeach the defendant's testimony if the statements were voluntary.
Supporting sources
No. A confession obtained after an unlawful arrest must be excluded when it is the direct result of the arrest and the causal chain has not been broken, even if Miranda warnings are repeated and time passes.
Supporting sources
Miranda v. Arizona <!-- acedexams opinion md v1 -- Case information - Court: Supreme Court of the United States - Citation: 384 U.S. 436, 86 S. Ct. 1602, 16 L. Ed. 2d 694 (1966) -…