CJ 208 cases test 2
About this set
Created by:
ashleycapri on April 8, 2012
Subjects:
Description:
Patracelli cases for test 2
Log in to favorite or report as inappropriate.
Order by
16 terms
Terms | Definitions |
|---|---|
 Miranda v AZ | - prosecution cannot use statements stemming from custodial interrogation unless Miranda warnings are issue - custodial: been deprived of your freedom in some significant way - interrogation: a person is being questioned about a crime |
| Mincey v AZ` | a confession must be the product of a person's own free will or rational choice |
| North Carolina v Butler | Suspect made inculpatory (incriminating remarks leads toward your guilt) vs exculpatory: non incriminating - there is no need for an explicit written or verbal waiver of Miranda - Many officers have their suspects sign a waiver |
| Moran v Burbin | police don't have to act as a messenger service for a criminal suspect (you must ask for a lawyer) defined conditions of a valid waiver of Miranda (2 conditions in place to hold a valid waiver of miranda) - has to be voluntary and made without coercion - has to be a knowing waiver - criminal suspect has to be aware of the rights and consequences that they are giving up |
| Tague v LA | When it comers to providing a valid waiver of Miranda it's on the prosecution |
| Connecticut v Barrett | Conditional waiver of Miranda: if conditions are placed upon the waiver if the police officer makes a reasonable effort to meet those conditions then the conditions are valid |
| Colorado v Spring | Once you waive Miranda and begin talking to the cops everything you say to them will be used against you |
| Michigan v Mosley | if there is a significant "cooling off" period between the issuance of Miranda warnings then subsequent inculpatory remarks are valid (cooling off period is about 2 hrs) |
| Edwards v Arizona | there can be no interrogation after invoking your right to counsel UNLESS the suspect re-initiates contact with the police |
| Minnick v MS | Once you say you want a lawyer the police can't talk to you unless a lawyer is present or you re-initiate contact |
| California v Prysock | There is no necessity for verbatim Miranda Warnings, if an officer conveys the substance of Miranda warnings it's ok |
| Non custodial interactions | traffic stops and terry stops are non custodial interactions |
| US v. Griffin | Indicia of custody: whether or not they are: free to go, placed under arrest, suspect maintained freedom of movement, suspect initiated contact, suspect agreed to answer questions, and suspect is in a police dominated atmosphere |
| Road Island v Innis | (interrogation) any words or actions on the part of the police that a reasonable person would think is an attempt to illicit an incriminating response from a suspect |
| NY v Quarles | When there is a compelling issue of public safety then Miranda Warnings are not required |
| US v Wade | requiring a suspect to participate in a line up does not violate 5th amendment privileges |
First Time Here?
Welcome to Quizlet, a fun, free place to study. Try these flashcards, find others to study, or make your own.