SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Bearcatbob who wrote (367034)6/1/2010 7:49:02 PM
From: mph   of 793782
 
USSC decision on Miranda rights, for those who wish to read it.

-Criminal Law and Procedure-
Where defendant who was advised of his Miranda rights was largely silent during three-hour interrogation and at no point said that he wanted to remain silent, that he did not want to talk with the police, or that he wanted an attorney, state court’s determination that defendant impliedly waived his right to remain silent when he made an incriminating statement was not error. Even if it was ineffective assistance for defense counsel at trial to fail to instruct the jury that it could consider evidence of the outcome of a trial of defendant’s accomplice only to assess credibility, not defendant’s guilt, defendant failed to show prejudice where the outcome would not likely have been different given the evidence against him.
Berghuis v. Thompkins - filed June 1, 2010
Cite as 08-1470
Full text metnews.com
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News