We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
DO YOU BELIEVE IN MIRANDA? THE SUPREME COURT REVEALS ITS DOUBTS IN BERGHUIS V. THOMPKINS BY PARADOXICALLY RULING THAT SUSPECTS CAN ONLY INVOKE THEIR RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT BY SPEAKING.
- Authors
Dery III, George M.
- Abstract
The article focuses on the issues regarding on a case, Miranda v. Arizona's right to remain silent and its connectivity with another court case, Berghuis v. Thompkins in the U.S. It mentions the legal proceedings as well as the ruling and treatment for the Miranda case by the Supreme Court, where protection against self-incrimination has been granted. Meanwhile, the Thompkins' case also adopted the right to remain silent which was based on Miranda case's stance. However, it cites the burden encountered during the ruling of the Miranda case due to waiver issues. The judgment on Thompkins' case based on Miranda's ruling is also reported.
- Subjects
ACTIONS &; defenses (Administrative law); LEGAL judgments; CASE disposition; MIRANDA v. Arizona; BERGHUIS v. Thompkins; PRIVILEGES &; immunities (Law); SELF-incrimination; JUDICIAL process; UNITED States. Supreme Court
- Publication
George Mason University Civil Rights Law Journal, 2011, Vol 21, Issue 3, p407
- ISSN
1049-4766
- Publication type
Article