Criminal,
Constitutional Law,
9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
Jun. 4, 2021
9th Circuit conservatives try to tee up Miranda question for high court
The appellate court affirmed a panel ruling Thursday reversing a civil trial defeat by a hospital worker who sued Los Angeles County because prosecutors used an un-Mirandized statement against him in a criminal trial for sexual assault.
A group of 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals conservatives are trying to tee up a question that has been raised in the U.S. Supreme Court a few times since the original 1966 ruling: Is the failure to give a Miranda warning a constitutional violation?
The appellate court affirmed a panel ruling Thursday reversing a civil trial defeat by a hospital worker who sued Los Angeles County because prosecutors used an un-Mirandized st...
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
Enewsletter Sign-up
Related Content
Criminal Law and Procedure
Dickerson v. United States
Miranda created a constitutional rule that the U.S. Congress cannot legislatively supersede.
Constitutional Law
Chavez v. Martinez
Self-incriminating statements obtained through coercion but not used against detainee did not lead to Fifth Amendment violation.
