Cert granted. The opinion below was quite right on the law, suggesting that a cutting back of Miranda rights may be under consideration.
https://twitter.com/orinkerr/status/1400913001679523842
In my view, the history here is a mess but a stable mess; on stare decisis grounds, the Court would be smart to just leave this body of law alone. But I don’t know how many Justices are so inclined.
This may end up being a pretty big criminal procedure case; the first big Miranda decision in a few years. Worth watching.
Cert petn is here: supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/2…
There's a second question argued in the petition: If admitting the un-Mirandized statement is a constitutional wrong, who is responsible for it? The officer? The court? The prosecution?
There's a second question argued in the petition: If admitting the un-Mirandized statement is a constitutional wrong, who is responsible for it? The officer? The court? The prosecution?
I'm not entirely sure that 2nd issue is fully before them, but if it is, why isn't the answer the same as it would be for any coerced statement that is admitted wrongfully? That is, Miranda can say the statement is involuntary, but once you say that, I'm not sure it does more.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
