Matthew T. Mangino
The Youngstown Vindicator
February 14, 2016
Fifty years ago this month, U.S. Supreme Court Justice
Potter Stewart asked Atty. John J. Flynn, representing Ernesto Miranda before
the court, what rights an accused should be advised of while in custody. Flynn
replied, “[H]e had a right not to incriminate himself, that he had the right
not to make any statement, that he had a right to be free from further
questioning ... to be represented adequately by counsel in court, that if he
was too indigent and poor to employ counsel, that the state would furnish him
counsel.”
So was born Miranda v. Arizona, the landmark Supreme Court
decision that has become a part of American culture. Miranda’s conversion from
legal holding to cultural icon is due mainly to the nation’s insatiable
appetite for television crime dramas. Everyone with a TV has heard Miranda
warnings.
What did Miranda do to earn his place in the American
consciousness? In 1963, Ernesto Miranda was arrested on a robbery charge. While
in the midst of an interrogation by police, he confessed raping an 18-year-old
woman. At trial, prosecutors offered his confession into evidence. Miranda was
convicted of rape and sentenced to prison. Miranda appealed, and his case made
its way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Miranda and excluded his
confession. Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote the court’s opinion finding a
confession would be barred under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments unless a
suspect had been made aware of his rights and the suspect had waived them.
Warren made it clear, “If the individual indicates in any manner, at any time
prior to or during questioning, that he wishes to remain silent, the
interrogation must cease ... If the individual states that he wants an
attorney, the interrogation must cease until an attorney is present.”
Far from pristine
As we mark the 50th anniversary of Miranda, it is important
to note that the decision has remained far from pristine over the years. Nor
was the ruling placed on a pedestal beyond the reach an activist courts – quite
the contrary – the U.S. Supreme Court has continually tested, and at times,
expanded and restricted, the decision.
For instance, in 1981 the Edwards rule was established. The
court held once an accused invoked his right to have counsel present during
custodial interrogation a valid waiver of that right could not be later
established. The rule created a presumption that once a suspect invoked his
right to the presence of counsel, any waiver of that right in response to a
subsequent police attempt at custodial interrogation was involuntary.
That changed in 2010. In a case out of Maryland, the court
established a bright-line rule finding if at least 14 days passed from the time
the suspect invoked his rights under Miranda, the police could again initiate
an interrogation of the suspect.
Although the Miranda warnings are etched in nearly
everyone’s consciousness, the Supreme Court found that police do not have to
use those magical words to get the point across. In a 2010 case out of Florida,
the court said as long as the rights are articulated to a suspect in a
reasonable manner and the rights are understood, they are sufficient.
GINSBURG’S VIEW
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote, “The four warnings
Miranda requires are invariable, but this court has not dictated the words in
which the essential information must be conveyed.”
Then in 2011, the Supreme Court decided a North Carolina
case establishing that law enforcement must consider a suspect’s juvenile
status when carrying out the requirements of Miranda. “It is beyond dispute
that children will often feel bound to submit to police questioning when an
adult in the same circumstances would feel free to leave ... we hold that a
child’s age properly informs the Miranda custody analysis,” wrote Justice Sonia
Sotomayor.
Although Miranda has been revered for half a century, its
evolution may continue for years to come.
Matthew T. Mangino is of counsel with Luxenberg, Garbett,
Kelly & George P.C. His book “The Executioner’s Toll, 2010” was released by
McFarland Publishing. You can reach him at www.mattmangino.com and follow him
on Twitter @MatthewTMangino)
To visit the column CLICK HERE
No comments:
Post a Comment