Miranda
- Protecting the Innocent
The following was
written by
Utah Criminal Lawyer
Stephen
Howard and first
published by the Deseret
News on May 1, 2016 in a slightly edited form.
Posted here May 3, 2016.
Celebrating 50 Years Since Miranda v. Arizona
We have all
heard them in television or movies — typically as the recently captured
criminal is being led away by police. "
You have the right to remain
silent; anything you say can and will be used against you.…"
In the 50 years since the United States Supreme Court decided the
historic case of
Miranda
v. Arizona, the words of the
Miranda warnings
have become so common in our entertainment culture that it can be easy
to forget their real purpose and the very important role that they play
in protecting both the innocent and the guilty.
Nothing to Hide - Protecting the Innocent
It is well-documented that innocent people do sometimes falsely confess
to crimes that they did not in fact commit. Instances of confirmed
false confessions may be rare, and the circumstances leading to false
confessions can be complex. Perhaps more common are cases involving
true statements that may not rise to the level of a confession, but
still provide support for a criminal charge. It is again
well-documented that innocent people have been charged and jailed on
charges as serious as murder, based in part on truthful statements that
they made to police.
It is sometimes suggested that an innocent person has "nothing to hide"
and should therefore be willing to talk openly with police. But the
drafters of the Constitution recognized the risks involved in giving
government the power to compel confessions.
A decade before the
Miranda
decision was announced, the Supreme Court in
Ullmann v. United States
discussed the importance of the
Fifth
Amendment’s protections. The court noted that those who
drafted our Constitution "had in mind a lot of history which has been
largely forgotten today." The court observed that the drafters of our
Constitution "made a judgment and expressed it in our fundamental law,
that it were better for an occasional crime to go unpunished than that
the prosecution should be free to build up a criminal case, in whole or
in part, with the assistance of enforced disclosures by the accused."
In addressing the Fifth Amendment’s privilege against
self-incrimination, the Supreme Court stated, "Too many, even those who
should be better advised, view this privilege as a shelter for
wrongdoers. They too readily assume that those who invoke it are either
guilty of crime or commit perjury in claiming the privilege. Such a
view does scant honor to the patriots who sponsored the Bill of Rights.
…"
Continuing Necessity of Miranda
Requirements
Since the Supreme Court’s decision in
Miranda, police
have been required to specifically inform individuals of their
constitutional rights before conducting a custodial interrogation. A
police officer’s violation of
Miranda
can result in the exclusion at trial of any statements made by a
defendant.
There is debate among some as to whether police should be required to
strictly comply with
Miranda
procedures. There is debate as to whether the
Miranda warnings
are effective in avoiding coerced confessions. There is debate over
whether the exclusionary rule is effective in deterring abusive police
practices and whether the rule creates an unnecessary impediment to
legitimate prosecutions.
Some note that even when the
Miranda
warnings are given, the vast majority of defendants still make
voluntary statements to police. Some suggest that video recording
technology can provide adequate safeguards, even in the absence of
Miranda warnings,
against coerced confessions and abusive interrogation practices.
Miranda
Rights or Miranda
Warnings
While there are many issues relating to
Miranda that can be
debated, one point is clear — the rights referenced in the
Miranda warnings
come directly from the United States Constitution. These rights were
not created by the Supreme Court’s
Miranda
decision. And they exist independent of any police officer’s decision
to “read you your rights.”
Make Good Use of Your Constitutional Rights
As we commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the
Miranda decision,
if you find yourself confronted by a police officer who asks you to
answer questions or make a statement, remember that the United States
Constitution guarantees you the right to remain silent, and the right
to first seek the assistance and advice of a qualified attorney. Do
honor to those who created our Constitution and to those who defend it
— make good use of your constitutional rights.
Finding a Criminal Defense Lawyer in Utah

If
you have been contacted by a police officer or other government
investigator or if you have been charged with a crime, the assistance
of an experienced criminal defense attorney can be key to ensuring that
your rights are protected.
Contact us today to
see what the right attorney can do for you.