Federal Court Undercuts Miranda Law
A federal appeals court has ruled that, despite the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark 1966 Miranda decision, prosecutors can use a confession from a suspect who speaks before he has been read his rights.
In a 2-1 ruling Monday, a three-judge panel of the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals said a 1968 federal law on voluntary confessions takes precedence over the Miranda ruling in federal cases.
The decision could touch off a Supreme Court battle over the rights of criminal suspects.
In the meantime, the appeals court ruling is binding in Virginia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina and West Virginia.
The 1966 Miranda vs. Arizona decision, handed down by a Supreme Court far more liberal than today’s, said police who question suspects must first tell them of their right to remain silent and warn them that anything they say can be used against them. They must be told of their right to a lawyer and informed that one will be appointed for them if they cannot afford one.
Start your day right
Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
