LOCATION:Great Sioux Indian Reservation
DOCKET NO.: 79-5386
DECIDED BY: Burger Court (1975-1981)
LOWER COURT: Louisiana Supreme Court
CITATION: 444 US 469 (1980)
DECIDED: Jan 21, 1980
Facts of the case
This case study once again confirmed the need to apply the Miranda rule in practice and also the legal consequences of its not being used. The rule of Miranda was introduced by the decision of the US Supreme Court in 1966 with the aim of securing the right not to testify against oneself (nemo tenetur se ipsum accusare). Today, failure to comply with this requirement leads to the cancellation of information received from the suspect. It arose because of the offender, to whom the police officers did not explain his right to refuse to testify and the Supreme Court found it necessary to cancel the conviction decision based on apparently unreliable testimonies.Since then, any information received from a detainee during the interrogation before his rights were read to him can not be considered admissible evidence.