Miranda Rights Research Articles

Wrongful Convictions and Mental Illness

People with a mental illness (PWMI) are among the most vulnerable populations in the country, yet are far more likely to be incarcerated than people without a mental illness. PWMI are more likely to be wrongfully convicted for several reasons.At the onset of an investigation, PWMI are more likely to become suspects. Symptoms of mental illness breed fear and misunderstanding, arousing suspicion of a PWMI in the first place. Once approached by police, PWMI are more likely to escalate the initial encounter, leading to arrest and further interrogation. Through the lens of the Reid Technique, police misinterpret symptoms of mental illness as signs of guilt. Police continue using the Reid Technique to extract a confession. Mid- interrogation, PWMI are less likely to invoke Miranda rights. Without counsel, PWMI are more susceptible to minimization and maximation techniques, leading to higher rates of false confessions and ultimately, false convictions. These issues are significantly exacerbated for PWMI of color, who experience additional racial bias. From the beginning of an investigation to the end, the justice system seems perversely calculated to target innocent PWMI, rather than protect them. The case of James Blackmon demonstrates how an innocent PWMI can be railroaded into a false confession and wrongful conviction. This paper details Blackmon’s case, analyzes how each step of an investigation endangers PWMI, and examines possible solutions to protect innocent PWMI.

Whether Ihl Outlaws Terrorist Acts In Both International And Non-International Armed Conflict; And Addresses Counter- Terrorism Measures?

This article an attempt to identify legal rules which can be applicable to the members of terrorist networks and groups. It also dilates upon the right or wrong application of available International Laws-of-war to combat terrorism in both International and non-international armed conflicts; the situations which have not been adequately contemplated by International agreements in such laws; and the imminent circumstances, if any, for initiating reforms in these laws in order to address contemporary legal issues to fight terrorism; inasmuch as many countries, with different legal contexts, are either instigating or have started military actions, like the one in Afghanistan by military coalition. A section of critics believes that no such use of force against terrorist groups is legal unless resorted to in self defence and sufficient evidence is required to arrest them for an alleged violation of law. It might also lead to the inference that captured terrorists can claim Miranda rights of silence and demand legal assistance of a lawyer, which may prevent interrogation in regard to future terrorist activities. To answer these questions, the nexus of “jus in bello” with “terrorism” assume greater significance to help analyse fresh approach to alike International Armed Conflicts (IAC) and Non- international Armed Conflicts (NIAC).

Everyone has the right to understand: Teaching legal rights to ESL students

AbstractIn recent years, English as a second language (ESL) educators have developed a variety of online resources for addressing legal issues. The problem is that the authors’ understanding of laws and police procedures varies greatly, and so does their familiarity with relevant research, the breadth of topical coverage, and the quality of police‐themed units, discussion questions, and lesson plans. The aim of this article is to offer a research‐based approach to the integration of legal topics in ESL curricula. This discussion draws on the authors’ collective experience with public advocacy (Communication of Rights Group, 2015), research on the Miranda rights (Pavlenko, 2008; Pavlenko, Hepford, & Jarvis, 2019), and teaching the Miranda rights and other legal topics to diverse ESL populations, ranging from international college students to middle school pupils.

Competence to Waive Miranda Rights

In State v. Parker , 459 P.3d 793 (Kan. 2020), the Kansas Supreme Court heard a direct appeal from the district court regarding admissibility of statements made after the defendant, Willie Parker, read his Miranda rights but refused to sign the waiver and refused to have law enforcement read his

Protecting the rights of the accused: use of Spanish-language Miranda warnings in central Florida

ABSTRACT Large, systematic investigations of Miranda warnings have evidenced remarkable heterogeneity in length and reading level across American jurisdictions. For Spanish translations, marked disparities were found when compared to the original-English Miranda warnings including awkward wording, mistranslations, and even the complete omission of crucially important Miranda components. To complement these broad studies, the current research provides an in-depth analysis of Miranda warnings used by the 9th Judicial Circuit of central Florida. Based upon 15 side-by-side comparisons of Spanish and English warnings, Spanish warnings were longer and required substantially higher reading levels. Three of five Spanish Miranda components on average required a minimum reading level at the Spanish 10th to 12th grade level. Although all original English versions, included the 5th component (Continuing Rights) in the original English, 20% inexplicably failed to do so for the Spanish translations, raising fundamental concerns regarding equal protection under the law for non-English speaking detainees. Community-based initiatives are discussed for improving Spanish translations and increasing Spanish-speaking detainees’ accessibility to legal expertise and forensic consultants.

Hak-Hak Tersangka (Miranda Rule) pada Tahap Penyidikan dalam Kitab UU Hukum Acara Pidana

The protection of the rights of a criminal suspect is very important because after all the suspect is a person whose personal independence has been taken away as a result of arrest, detention, confiscation and so on. Therefore, the law is needed to guarantee the taking of rights from these suspects. The purpose of this research is to find out the arrangements for the rights of suspects (Miranda Rule) at the investigation stage in the Criminal Code Law and to discuss legal protection of the rights of suspects (Miranda Rule) at the investigation stage. This research uses a normative legal research method using a statutory approach by examining all laws related to the writing of the rights of suspects (Miranda Rule) at the investigation stage of the Criminal Procedure Code and a conceptual approach by combining expert opinions so that it becomes a researcher's argument. The results of the research show that the regulation of the rights of suspects (Miranda Rule) at the stage of investigation in the Criminal Procedure Code is suspected in Article 1 paragraph (14) of the Criminal Procedure Code for a person who due to his actions or circumstances, based on preliminary evidence, is reasonably suspected of being the perpetrator of a criminal offense, the Miranda Rule regulation applies in law. Criminal Procedure in Indonesia. Suspects. In addition, the legal protection of the suspect at the investigation stage has explicitly tried to provide protection to avoid harsh treatment of the suspect or defendant. Investigators should have followed the rules to explain the rights of suspects. Apart from that, special attention should be paid to law enforcement in Indonesia, and it is hoped that suspects must better understand their rights as suspects so that they can defend themselves.

An illusion of understanding

The purpose of the Miranda rights in the USA is to ensure that suspects know their fundamental rights under the law, yet even native speakers of English do not always understand their rights (Rogers, Rogstad, Gillard, Drogin, Blackwood and Shuman, 2010; Rogers, Rogstad, Steadham and Drogin, 2011). To evaluate their understanding, Grisso (1998) developed Miranda Rights Comprehension Instruments (MRCI), normed with native speakers and widely accepted in the legal community. Comprehension by second language (L2) speakers of English, on the other hand, is inferred based on their L2 proficiency, but no studies to date offer the scientific basis for causal connections between L2 proficiency and understanding of the Miranda rights. The purpose of the present study was to compare understanding of the Miranda rights among native (n = 82) and advanced L2 speakers of English (n = 183) to determine whether standardised assessments of L2 proficiency can predict comprehension of the Miranda rights. Our results show that most of our L2 participants failed to understand their Miranda rights and displayed significant disadvantages in basic level processing in comparison to native speakers. Furthermore, they were unaware of the failure: using linguistic resources at their disposal these advanced L2 speakers constructed alternative meanings that created an illusion of understanding.

The predictive power of intelligence: Miranda abilities of individuals with intellectual disability.

The Miranda v. Arizona (1966) decision was intended to protect individuals' rights in custodial situations. The purpose of this paper was to evaluate Miranda abilities of individuals with intellectual disability and evaluate the utility of intelligence in predicting these abilities. Additionally, we aimed to provide an updated resource for forensic examiners regarding the performance of individuals with intellectual disability on the Standardized Assessment of Miranda Abilities (SAMA). We hypothesized that IQ, particularly verbal intelligence and working memory, would significantly predict abilities related to recall, vocabulary, knowledge, and acquiescence in a sample with intellectual disability. Sixty-two individuals diagnosed with intellectual disability completed the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-4th ed. (WAIS-IV), the SAMA, and a background questionnaire. Participants demonstrated significantly worse Miranda abilities when compared to the normative sample of the SAMA apart from acquiescence, which they demonstrated at significantly higher rates. Participants exhibited limited existing knowledge of Miranda rights and showed minimal improvement following exposure to a Miranda warning. Verbal abilities were a significant predictor of recall and vocabulary abilities with large effect sizes on average (i.e., ds > 1). IQ was not predictive of misconceptions about Miranda or acquiescence. Verbal intelligence was an important contributor to understanding Miranda. This study provided data related to performance on the SAMA by a sample of individuals with intellectual disability. It may serve as a reference for evaluators, legal professionals, and law enforcement officers when working with justice-involved persons with suspected intellectual disability. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Tasing the Constitution: Conducted Electrical Weapons, Other Forceful Arrest Means, and the Validity of Subsequent Constitutional Rights Waivers

Conducted electrical weapons (CEWs) — the most famous and widely used of which are offered under the TASER brand — are ubiquitous tools of law enforcement, carried by the vast majority of law enforcement officers and routinely deployed. These devices subdue targets by coursing electric current through their bodies, thereby causing individuals to collapse as their muscles involuntarily contract. Yet this method of operation has raised concerns—voiced by researchers, advocates, and criminal defendants alike — that CEWs influence cognitive capacity in addition to muscle function as electric current potentially transits through the brain via the central nervous system. In the context of an arrest, this implicates criminal suspects’ ability to understand Miranda warnings given by officers and to competently waive their constitutional rights against self-incrimination and to counsel. Some have gone so far as to recommend a mandated delay between when suspects are tased and when officers may administer Miranda warnings in order to protect individuals’ rights. Intimate understandings of the law of Miranda v. Arizona and the true effects of CEWs on cognitive capacity are critical for determining the prudence of this recommendation, and have broader implications for the criminal justice system. This Article is the first to conduct a thorough survey and analysis of the law of Miranda with regard to how courts determine whether individuals’ waivers of their constitutional rights following Miranda warnings are knowing, intelligent, and voluntary. Ultimately, cognitive capacity is an important factor, but, in examining this faculty, courts generally rely most heavily on subjective indicia of mental acuity manifested at the time Miranda warnings were administered — e.g., reasoning ability, tone, bodily movements, and temperament. Objective indicia of mental acuity — i.e., those shown through empirical research to signal cognitive ability, such as age, education, intelligence, and blood alcohol content — are routinely treated as less valuable than subjective indicia, particularly when the two are in opposition. This presents a high bar for empirical research on the cognitive effects of CEWs to scale in order to meaningfully influence court determinations of the legitimacy of rights waivers. This Article is also the first to conduct a comprehensive survey and examination of the literature addressing the cognitive effects of CEWs and compare these effects to those of other forceful arrest methods. Studies reveal that, rather than having a unique effect on cognition through some interaction between electric current and the brain, CEWs actually appear to impact mental faculties through a general stress effect, which other forceful methods of arrest have as well — e.g., physical altercation, police dog attack, and pepper spray. Therefore, an exceptional rule requiring a delay in administering Miranda warnings to suspects subject to CEWs does not seem appropriate. Nevertheless, the literature does show forceful arrest methods meaningfully affecting individual mental acuity. While more research is necessary to more finely deduce the extent of these impacts, they appear to be such that courts should consider a forceful arrest close enough in time to the administration of a Miranda warning to be a negative factor in assessing defendants’ competence to waive their rights, similar to evidence indicating low intelligence or intoxication at the time of waiver.

MIRANDA WARNING, I.E. “YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT…” IN THE IRISH AND POLISH CRIMINAL LAW

This article presents the role and the meaning of the key element of the Miranda Warning, i.e. the right to remain silent in the Irish criminal proceedings. The cognitive value is also refl ected in the comparison of that rule with the right to refuse to make a statement by the detained, applicable in the Polish criminal procedural law.

경찰통역 담화에서 의문문 유형과 기능 : 제도대화의 특징을 중심으로

This study intends to examine the types and functions of interrogative sentences used in the interpreting of police-suspect interview discourse in Korea. The findings of this analysis are as follows: First, the Korean police usually employed wh-interrogative sentences to ask for information from foreign suspects while using negative yes-no questions or declarative questions to refute the statements of foreign suspects. This attests to the fact that police officers use different types of interrogative sentences based on their investigation strategies. Second, foreign suspects made a number of questions about the intention of police officers’ questions or others. In particular, they asked questions the most when they were read their Miranda rights. This was mainly caused by the imbalance of knowledge between the two sides, which is one of the features found in institutional discourse. In the end, foreign suspects use a question as a means to protect their rights and make a statement favorable to themselves. Third, interpreters asked questions mainly about the case under examination to foreign suspects and police officers. This was also attributable to the imbalance of information and knowledge between the parties involved. In addition, interpreters sometimes asked additional questions to foreign suspects to get exact answers to the questions asked by police officers. This shows that interpreters use questions to confirm the accuracy of their interpretation or lead foreign suspects to provide answers appropriate to the questions police officers ask.

You have the right to remain silent: The ability of adolescents with developmental language disorder to understand their legal rights

PurposeThis study compared Miranda Rights comprehension of adolescents with developmental language disorder (DLD) and their typically developing (TD) peers. MethodInstruments for Assessing Understanding and Appreciation of Miranda Rights (Grisso, 1998) was administered to 20 adolescents with DLD and 20 age-matched TD peers. ResultsThe DLD group exhibited significantly greater difficulty in understanding and appreciating Miranda Rights than their TD peers. Adolescents with DLD were 7 times more likely to be at risk of failing to sufficiently understand the Miranda warnings than adolescents in the TD group. DiscussionAdolescents with DLD are particularly vulnerable to failing to understand Miranda Rights and the consequences of waiving them. Future work should determine if there is a link between difficulty comprehending legal rights and the high prevalence of adolescents with language disorder in juvenile detention facilities.

Safety from False Confessions

In certain fields, the meaning of a “safety-critical system” is well understood, and resources are, therefore, invested in modern safety methods, which significantly reduces the rate of accidents. For example, the aviation field abandoned the obsolete “Fly-Fix-Fly” approach and developed more advanced safety methods that generally follow an “Identify-Analyze-Control” model and are aimed at “First-Time-Safe.” Under the latter approach, there is systematic identification of future hazards, analysis of the probability of their occurrence, and a complete neutralization of the risk or at least its reduction to an acceptable level. As explained in the article, a false conviction is no less a system error and accident than a combat-plane crash. Yet in criminal law, a “Hidden Accidents Principle” governs and the overwhelming majority of false convictions are never detected. Consequently, no thought has ever been given to safety in the system. Empiric studies based on the Innocence Project’s findings point to a very high false-conviction rate: at least 5% for the most serious crimes. About one-quarter of those convictions had been determined to be based on a false confession. Current confession law — in particular, the Miranda rules — only addresses the possibility of an involuntary confession. It does not seriously deal with the existing possibility of false confessions (which may be voluntary). This article proposes a theory and some initial tools for incorporating modern safety into the criminal justice system. Specifically, I demonstrate how the innovative “System-Theoretic Accident Model and Processes” (STAMP) safety model can be applied in the criminal justice system, by developing constraints, controls, and barriers against the existing hazards in the context of convictions grounded on the defendant’s confession during police interrogation.

Probative values and their affecting factors of criminal investigation records

Following improvements in evidential thinking, more questions have been raised about the probative values of criminal investigation records; therefore, there is an urgent need to investigate the prominent problems with this system for keeping investigation notes and evidence. The binding 2013 Criminal Procedural Law of the People's Republic of China lists the victim's statement, defendant's confession or defence, inspection, examination, identification, and investigation notes as statutory evidence. Technically, these criminal investigation records are naturally legally admissible as evidenced in criminal justice procedures. However, the Miranda rules of the United States, which guarantee the defendant's right to silence, have not been established in mainland China. Consequently, the objectivity of those kinds of criminal investigation records can be questioned during cross-examination. Comparative and systematic research methods were used to examine the probative values and their affecting factors in criminal investigation records. The results show that it is not easy to obtain the full probative value of criminal investigation records because it involves analyses of issues such as understanding the notes, procedures, and methods in making the records, as well as the reform of related systems, such as transplanting the Miranda rules to secure the defendant's right to silence and the presence of counsel. Only in this way can we expect evidence used in criminal investigation records to be used scientifically by ensuring that evidence of criminal acts are kept free from irrational contamination and resolve the existing related problems in judicial practice.

Point/Counterpoint on the Miranda Decision: Should It Be Replaced or Retained?

In this point/counterpoint exchange, Professors Paul Cassell and Amos Guiora debate the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Miranda v. Arizona. Cassell challenges the decision, arguing that it has had harmful effects on American law enforcement efforts. Cassell cites evidence that the decision led to reduction in crime clearance rates and urges that the restrictions in the decision be replaced by a requirement that the police videotape interrogations. Cassell urges prosecutors to consider arguing that modern tools like videotaping creates a legal regime that allows the technical Miranda rules to be regarded as superseded relics of an outmoded and harmful prophylactic regime. Guiora responds that the Miranda decision was required to protect vulnerable suspects during inherently coercive police interrogation. Guiora reviews the language Chief Justice Warren used in the Miranda decision, noting that Warren was concerned to ensure that a suspect’s basic constitutional rights were respected by law enforcement while conducting custodial interrogation. Guiora concludes that the decision remains as important today as it was when handed down in 1966.

Self-Perceived Likelihood of False Confession: A Comparison of Justice-Involved Juveniles and Adults

False confessions represent a significant problem for the criminal and juvenile justice systems and juveniles may be at particular risk for falsely confessing. In part, this risk may be due to juveniles’ greater likelihood of waiving Miranda rights and, consequently, undergoing interrogation, as well as their heightened suggestibility and greater susceptibility to and compliance with authority figures compared to adults. With data from 260 participants in correctional facilities, this study compared juveniles’ ( n = 168) and adults’ ( n = 92) self-reported likelihood of false confessions. Younger juveniles reported significantly greater false confession propensity than did adults, especially in response to directive interrogation techniques. Older juveniles did not differ significantly from adults in their self-reported likelihood of false confession. Miranda rights comprehension mediated the relationship between age and false confession likelihood. These findings suggest the need for greater protections of younger juveniles during interrogations.

Feigned Miranda Impairment by Legally Involved Juveniles: The Vulnerability of Forensic Measures and the Development of Effective Screens

Forensic studies have almost entirely neglected research on adolescent offenders and their abilities to engage in malingering and other forms of deception. The present research represents the first empirical investigation into feigned Miranda-specific impairment by legally involved juveniles. Feigners ( n = 62) were compared with archival data ( n = 245) under genuine conditions. With virtually no preparation, juveniles effectively feigned major impairment on the Miranda Rights Comprehension Instruments (MRCI) and most aggregate scores of the Juvenile Miranda Quiz (JMQ). Based on established detection strategies, feigning scales were examined for both the MRCI and JMQ. Consistent with adult detainee research, the JMQ floor effect (JMQ FE) yielded good sensitivities and very high specificities. Low scale scores on the MRCI Comprehension of Miranda Rights–Recognition-II (CMR-R-II) evidenced strong promise at identifying potential feigners for more extensive evaluations. As discussed, forensic evaluators cannot afford to ignore feigned legal incapacities when examining pre-adjudicated adolescents.

Interrogative Specialists and False Confessions: Debunking the Con Artist Myth

Within the criminal justice system, confessions are an extremely powerful form of evidence. Unfortunately, innocent people sometimes falsely confess to crimes they did not actually commit. Such travesties of justice have sparked a significant degree of academic research into the false confession phenomenon. Within the existing literature, there exists a conceptual framework that the interrogative methods and actions of law enforcement officers are a key cause of false confessions with some researchers going so far as to suggest that law enforcement interrogators act as confidence men who trick criminal subjects into confessing. However, few researchers have actually questioned law enforcement officers about false confessions and even fewer have consulted with officers who specialize in interrogation. This study is a subset of a larger qualitative case study designed to explore the experiences of 13 federal law enforcement polygraph examiners who specialize in interrogation regarding their approach to criminal interrogation and their experiences with both true and false confessions. This study focused on the personal processes federal law enforcement polygraph examiners use in reviewing Miranda rights and documenting confessions. NVivo software was used to organize the data. Common themes in interview responses were then identified and revealed that participants employ an open, detailed, and straightforward approach in reviewing Miranda rights and documenting the confessions of criminal subjects. These findings contradict the premise that law enforcement interrogators inherently operate as confidence men by tricking and manipulating criminal subjects.

The MRCI with juvenile detainees: optimizing performance or emphasizing ecological validity?

The Miranda Rights Comprehension Instruments (MRCI) are intended to be administered to legally involved youths in a setting free from distractions and stressors with the explicit goal of assessing the examinee's best understanding. However, marked disparities have been observed between juveniles' MRCI performance and their unassisted recall of a representative Miranda warning. We hypothesized that youths' very strong MRCI performance might be partially due to prompts and clarifications used whenever incomplete or ambiguous answers are provided. In this archival study, we systematically re-scored three MRCI instruments from 231 legally involved youths to evaluate their original responses (i.e., non-queried scoring). This approach is viewed as more ecologically valid because actual Miranda warnings are typically provided in a routine manner without assistance following each Miranda component. For the large majority of legally involved juveniles, only small differences were noted between standard and non-queried scoring. However, some dramatic decrements were observed, especially on the Comprehension of Miranda Rights-II (CMR-II). More specifically, 15.7% of CMR-II percentiles dropped precipitously by 60% or more, when using the non-queried scores. The results are discussed within the context of optimized performances versus ecological validity as applied to Miranda evaluations.

The neurocognitive effects of a conducted electrical weapon compared to high intensity interval training and alcohol intoxication - implications for Miranda and consent

While the physiologic effects of conducted electrical weapons (CEW) have been the subjects of numerous studies over nearly two decades, their effects on neurocognitive functioning, both short-term and long-term, have only recently been studied. In a 2014 study involving use-of-force scenarios, including a CEW scenario, we found that there was a decline in neurocognitive performance immediately post-scenario in all groups; however this effect was transient, of questionable clinical/legal significance, not statistically different between the groups, and, returned to baseline by one hour post-scenario. Two subsequent studies by other authors have also found transient neurocognitive effects in the immediate post-exposure period; however, in one study, the effect was greater in one measure (of 5) for the CEW compared to exertion, and the authors suggested that this effect could have implications for the Miranda waiver obtained before custodial interrogation as well as consent.In our current study, we compared the neurocognitive effects of an exposure to a CEW to another exertion regimen, as well as to alcohol intoxication given the latter has significant established case law with regard to the Miranda waiver and consent. Such a comparison may offer more insight into the clinical/legal significance of any measured changes. As with the prior studies, the neurocognitive performance decrements of the CEW and exertion regimens, found only in one measure in this study (of three), were transient, and here, non-significant. Only alcohol intoxication resulted in statistically significant performance declines across all measures and these were persistent over the study period. Given that the neurocognitive changes associated with the CEW were non-significant, but were significant for alcohol intoxication, and given that current case law does not use intoxication as a per se or bright line barrier to Miranda and consent, our results do not suggest that a CEW exposure should preclude waiving of Miranda rights or obtaining consent.