Boston University Law Review

Articles from Vol. 97, No. 3, 2017

Disentangling Miranda and Massiah: How to Revive the Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel as a Tool for Regulating Confession Law
INTRODUCTIONFifty years after Miranda v. Arizona,1 many have lamented the ways in which the Burger, Rehnquist, and Roberts Courts have cut back on Miranda's protections.2 Miranda warnings are only required when a suspect is in custody and is being interrogated,3...
Exporting and Importing Miranda
IntroductionMiranda v. Arizona1 just had a milestone birthday. Perhaps the United States Supreme Court's best-known criminal procedure decision, it has been both revered and reviled for over fifty years. I am on record as an estranged former supporter....
Manipulation of Suspects and Unrecorded Questioning: After Fifty Years of Miranda Jurisprudence, Still Two (or Maybe Three) Burning Issues
IntroductionIn the fifty years since Miranda v. Arizona1 was decided, most of the big constitutional questions about interrogation have been resolved, at least to the Supreme Court's satisfaction. Miranda held that an individual's statements made during...
Miranda for the Next Fifty Years: Why the Fifth Amendment Should Go Fourth
INTRODUCTIONThis Article addresses two curious anomalies about Miranda v. Arizona.1 The first of these is that while Miranda has become a venerated landmark, etched, as Chief Justice Rehnquist said, into our national culture,2 the Miranda rules have...
Miranda's Fourfold Failure
IntroductionIn 1966, five Justices of the Supreme Court sought to civilize police interrogation in America.1 Fifty years later, their efforts appear to have been an abject failure. As Scott Howe observes, today's law of interrogation "facilitates bad...
Miranda's Spider Web
"Will you walk into my parlour?" said the Spider to the Fly. -Mary Howitt, The Spider and The Fly: A Fable (1829).1We know how that turned out for the fly! I want to argue today that suspects are like the fly and Miranda v. Arizona2 is, if not the spider,...
Resurrecting Miranda's Right to Counsel
IntroductionThe pedantic policeman's Miranda warning:OK. Listen up. I am going to read you your rights. You have the right to remain silent.1 Anything you say can be used against you.2 You have the right to an attorney.3 If you can't afford one, an attorney...
The Miranda App: Metaphor and Machine
INTRODUCTIONFor fifty years, a familiar scene has played out in interrogation rooms across America. Police officers read suspects the Miranda warnings.1 Suspects listen to the warnings before either waiving or invoking their Fifth Amendment rights.2...
The Miranda Case Fifty Years Later
I. A LOOK BACK AT MIRANDAA decade after the Supreme Court decided Miranda v. Arizona,1 Geoffrey Stone took a close look at the eleven decisions the Court had handed down "concerning the scope and application of Miranda."2 As Stone observed, "[i]n ten...
The Prophylactic Fifth Amendment
JUSTICE KENNEDY: So beating a prisoner to compel a-a statement is not a Fifth Amendment violation.DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL PAUL CLEMENT: That's right, Justice Kennedy. It's not a Fifth Amendment violation. . . .JUSTICE KENNEDY: What about the order of...
Transparency and Truth during Custodial Interrogations and Beyond
I. IntroductionMy goal in this Symposium is not to disrespect the Warren Court Revolution. The Warren Court's constitutionalization of the rules of criminal procedure during the 1960s was quite clearly necessary at the time, in large part to terminate...
Two Cheers for Miranda
"An understanding of the nature and setting of . . . in-custody interrogation is essential to our decisions today."-Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 445 (1966).Many commentators, including some of the contributors to this Symposium, have few kind words...
Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.