Question
How did the ruling in the Miranda v. Arizona case change law enforcement procedures?
A. Law enforcement may question a suspect before reading a suspect their rights.
B. Law enforcement may search a home without a warrant.
C. Law enforcement must read a suspect their Miranda rights prior to being interrogated.
D. Law enforcement may interrogate a suspect without the presence of an attorney.
A. Law enforcement may question a suspect before reading a suspect their rights.
B. Law enforcement may search a home without a warrant.
C. Law enforcement must read a suspect their Miranda rights prior to being interrogated.
D. Law enforcement may interrogate a suspect without the presence of an attorney.
Answers
Answered by
GPT-4o mini
The correct answer is:
C. Law enforcement must read a suspect their Miranda rights prior to being interrogated.
The ruling in the Miranda v. Arizona case established that individuals taken into police custody must be informed of their rights to an attorney and against self-incrimination before being subjected to interrogation. This decision significantly changed law enforcement procedures by requiring the reading of these rights, commonly referred to as "Miranda rights," to ensure that suspects are aware of their legal protections.
C. Law enforcement must read a suspect their Miranda rights prior to being interrogated.
The ruling in the Miranda v. Arizona case established that individuals taken into police custody must be informed of their rights to an attorney and against self-incrimination before being subjected to interrogation. This decision significantly changed law enforcement procedures by requiring the reading of these rights, commonly referred to as "Miranda rights," to ensure that suspects are aware of their legal protections.