U.S. Supreme Court,
Constitutional Law
Jun. 16, 2010
Silencing Miranda
In Berguis v. Thompkins, the Supreme Court has taken a major step to lessening the Constitution's protection against self-incrimination, writes Erwin Chemerinksy of UCI Law.
Erwin Chemerinsky
Dean and Jesse H. Choper Distinguished Professor of Law, UC Berkeley School of Law
Erwin's most recent book is "Worse Than Nothing: The Dangerous Fallacy of Originalism." He is also the author of "Closing the Courthouse," (Yale University Press 2017).
In Berguis v. Thompkins, 2010 DJDAR 8047, the Supreme Court took a major step to lessening the Constitution's protection against self-incrimination.The Supreme Court held that a criminal suspect's silence, even for a period of hours, is not enough to invoke the right to remain silent. Even a single word after hours of silence is enough to waive this right.
In Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), the Supreme...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In