Terrorism, Miranda, and Related Matters

Written By: Reid
Jul 23, 2013

In April of this year, the Congressional Research Service published a document entitled, Terrorism, Miranda, and Related Matters by Charles Doyle, Senior Specialist in American Public Law.

From the Introduction:

"In Miranda v. Arizona, the Supreme Court held that no statement made by an individual during a custodial interrogation may be admitted into evidence against him at his criminal trial, unless he was first warned of his relevant constitutional rights and waived them. In New York v. Quarles, the Court later held that the Miranda rule was subject to a "public safety" exception. Throughout this period, federal law stated that following arrest a suspect should be presented to a magistrate and advised of his rights without "unnecessary delay." Confessions made during the course of any unnecessary delay are generally inadmissible at the suspect's subsequent criminal trial. The realities of contemporary terrorism are such that some have questioned whether these general rules can be, and should be, reexamined and adjusted."

Continue Reading