How did the ruling in the Miranda v. Arizona case change law enforcement procedures.
The ruling in Miranda v. Arizona, a landmark Supreme Court case in 1966, led to significant changes in law enforcement procedures relating to the interrogation of suspects in custody. The court held that before a suspect can be questioned by police while in custody, they must be informed of their constitutional right to remain silent and their right to an attorney. This led to the creation of the Miranda rights, which include:
1. The right to remain silent
2. Anything the suspect says can be used against them in court
3. The right to have an attorney present during questioning
4. The right to have an attorney appointed if the suspect cannot afford one
This ruling changed law enforcement procedures by establishing clear guidelines for how suspects must be advised of their rights before being interrogated. It aimed to protect the Fifth Amendment rights of suspects against self-incrimination and ensure that any statements made during interrogation were voluntary and not coerced. As a result, police departments across the United States were required to implement Miranda warnings into their procedures when questioning individuals in custody.