Miranda rights

GPTKB entity

Statements (59)
Predicate Object
gptkbp:instanceOf legal rights
gptkbp:application custodial interrogation
gptkbp:appliesTo public safety exceptions
gptkbp:can_be the suspect
in writing
gptkbp:challenges court
court cases
gptkbp:criticalReception the right to a fair trial
gptkbp:criticism the general public
being too lenient on suspects
gptkbp:established Miranda_v._Arizona_case
https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label Miranda rights
gptkbp:includes an attorney
remain silent
gptkbp:is_a legal protection
gptkbp:is_a_key_component_of due process
gptkbp:is_a_subject_of criminal justice system
legal research and analysis
numerous legal debates
gptkbp:is_a_time_for coercive circumstances
misunderstanding of rights
gptkbp:is_designed_to protect_the_Fifth_Amendment_rights
gptkbp:is_essential_for upholding justice
preventing wrongful convictions
fair legal process
protecting individual liberties
maintaining public trust in law enforcement
protecting the accused's rights
American_legal_history
gptkbp:is_evaluated_by gptkb:the_Supreme_Court
gptkbp:is_featured_in gptkb:Miranda_warning
popular media
a guarantee of freedom
gptkbp:is_part_of U.S._constitutional_law
gptkbp:is_recognized_for various legal systems
gptkbp:is_used_in legal textbooks
law school curricula
police training manuals
legal_arguments
gptkbp:isProtectedBy self-incrimination
gptkbp:leads dismissal of evidence
gptkbp:legal_principle interrogation procedures.
gptkbp:outcome criminal cases
gptkbp:performedBy the suspect at any time
gptkbp:previousName gptkb:Ernesto_Miranda
gptkbp:related_to the right to counsel
gptkbp:requires law enforcement officers
the suspect is not in custody
inform suspects of their rights
clear and understandable
suspects before questioning
gptkbp:suitableFor federal and state cases
gptkbp:taught law enforcement training programs
gptkbp:variant jurisdiction
gptkbp:was_a_factor_in defense strategies
gptkbp:was_a_response_to police interrogation practices
gptkbp:was_a_result_of the need for police accountability
the 1966 Supreme Court ruling
the need for legal safeguards