Which case established the requirement to inform suspects of their rights before custodial interrogation?

Which case established the requirement to inform suspects of their rights before custodial interrogation?

• A. Miranda v. Arizona
• B. Whren v. U.S.
• C. Illinois v. Gates
• D. Brown v. Board of Education

Answer: (A)

Miranda warnings are required whenever a suspect is in custody and subject to interrogation. The decision in Miranda v. Arizona established that to protect Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination, police must inform the suspect of the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney, and obtain a knowing and voluntary waiver of these rights before questioning. The warnings typically spell out that anything said can be used in court, that the right to an attorney exists, and that if the suspect cannot afford one, an attorney will be provided. If the warnings aren’t given or a valid waiver isn’t obtained, any statements made during the custodial interrogation may be excluded from evidence. The other cases listed deal with different legal issues—Whren v. U.S. on traffic stops and subjective intent, Illinois v. Gates on probable cause for searches, and Brown v. Board of Education on desegregation—so they do not establish the rights-warning requirement.

Miranda warnings are required whenever a suspect is in custody and subject to interrogation. The decision in Miranda v. Arizona established that to protect Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination, police must inform the suspect of the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney, and obtain a knowing and voluntary waiver of these rights before questioning. The warnings typically spell out that anything said can be used in court, that the right to an attorney exists, and that if the suspect cannot afford one, an attorney will be provided. If the warnings aren’t given or a valid waiver isn’t obtained, any statements made during the custodial interrogation may be excluded from evidence. The other cases listed deal with different legal issues—Whren v. U.S. on traffic stops and subjective intent, Illinois v. Gates on probable cause for searches, and Brown v. Board of Education on desegregation—so they do not establish the rights-warning requirement.