Also known as: Miranda rule · Miranda exclusionary rules · Miranda warnings · Miranda rights
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A prophylactic rule that excludes from the prosecution's case in chief any statement obtained during custodial interrogation without the required Miranda warnings. The rule rests on an irrebuttable presumption of compulsion and therefore applies even when the statement is otherwise voluntary under the Fifth Amendment. It sweeps more broadly than the constitutional privilege against self-incrimination itself.
Officer Patel pulled over Mohan Malhotra for a broken taillight and questioned him about recent burglaries while Malhotra remained in the driver's seat. After Malhotra admitted possessing stolen goods, Patel placed him in the patrol car and continued questioning without warnings. The court admitted the roadside statements because the initial encounter was a routine traffic stop that remained noncustodial.
Detective Ruiz arrested Mustafa Mahmoud and read a version of the warnings that stated police had no lawyer available at the station but one would be appointed later if Mahmoud went to court. Mahmoud then confessed. The court held the warnings sufficient because they conveyed the essential rights, so the statement was admissible under the Miranda exclusionary rule.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Police arrested Maria Morales for murder and obtained a signed waiver after giving full Miranda warnings. Unknown to Morales, her retained attorney had called the station seeking access. The court admitted the resulting confession because the undisclosed attorney contact did not invalidate the otherwise knowing and voluntary waiver.
No. The rule excludes unwarned statements even when they are voluntary because it rests on an irrebuttable presumption of compulsion that sweeps more broadly than the Fifth Amendment itself.
Supporting sources
The rule bars use in the prosecution's case in chief but permits use to impeach the defendant's testimony if the statement is otherwise voluntary.
Supporting sources
No. Routine traffic stops are ordinarily noncustodial because they are temporary and brief, so the Miranda exclusionary rule does not apply to ordinary roadside questioning.
Supporting sources
…only question presented by the petition for certiorari reads as follows: “Whether law enforcement officers must give ‘Miranda warnings’ to individuals arrested for misdemeanor traffic offenses.” In Parts I, II, and IV of its opinion, the Court answers that question in the affirmative and explains why that answer requires…