United States Supreme Court
467 U.S. 649 (1984) |
Two parties involved
Petitioner
|
Facts of the case
The police followed a man who was carrying a weapon into the super market. Once he was caught, he no longer had the weapon on him. When asked where he had placed it, the man told the police the fire arm's location. At the time of the trial, the court refused to use the weapon as evidence stating that he had not been read his rights. The Supreme Court ruled that Miranda does not apply in instances related to public safety ("LexisNexis"). |
Issues
Would public safety be the exception to the requirement that Miranda warnings be given before a suspect’s statements may be admitted into evidence at trial ("LexisNexis")? |
Holding/Rational
(Rehnquist, J.) A suspect in police custody may be questioned without first being read his Miranda warnings if public safety demand it. The Fifth Amendment prohibits the admission of coerced statements, but does not prohibit the admission of all incriminating statements. Police may question a suspect in custody without first reading him his Miranda warnings because a public safety exception is not inconsistent with Miranda. Public safety was the concern when the police officers asked where the gun was, there was no coerce environment ("LexisNexis"). |
Dissenting
(Marshall, J.) Any interrogation can be coercive and Miranda should apply in this case. The court's opinion was based that the public was in danger. The court fails to address the issue about whether or not police questioning concerning public safety is still a coercive type of questioning ("LexisNexis"). |