Miranda rule

Primary tabs

The Miranda Rule refers to the constitutional requirement that police officers give detainees a Miranda warning that describes their constitutional rights when faced with interrogation.

The requirement to give Miranda warnings came from the Supreme Court decision, Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436 (1966). In Miranda, the Court held that a defendant cannot be questioned by police in the context of a custodial interrogation until the defendant is made aware of the right to remain silent, the right to consult with an attorney and have the attorney present during questioning, and the right to have an attorney appointed if indigent.

These warnings stem from the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.   

Without a Miranda warning or a valid waiver of the Miranda rights, statements made may be inadmissible at trial under the exclusionary rule, which prevents a party from using evidence at trial which had been gathered in violation of the United States Constitution. For example, New York Criminal Procedure §60.45 states that “evidence of a written or oral confession, admission, or other statement made by a defendant with respect to his participation or lack of participation in the offense charged, may not be received in evidence against him in a criminal proceeding if such statement was involuntarily made.” A statement is considered involuntarily made if it is obtained “in violation of such rights as the defendant may derive from the constitution of this state or of the United States.”

The language used by Justice Warren in Miranda v. Arizona has given rise to the various Miranda warnings provided by police officers to detainees, which differ by jurisdiction. The Court specifically held that: “Prior to any questioning, the person must be warned that he has a right to remain silent, that any statement he does make may be used as evidence against him, and that he has a right to the presence of an attorney, either retained or appointed. The defendant may waive effectuation of these rights, provided the waiver is made voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently.” (Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436, 444).

[Last updated in July of 2023 by the Wex Definitions Team]