Footnotes (175)



Miranda's Hidden Right

Laurent Sacharoff

University of Arkansas School of Law

February 21, 2011

Alabama Law Review, Forthcoming

Miranda v. Arizona said that a suspect can waive her right to remain silent but also that she must invoke it. How can both be true about the same right? This article argues that the Miranda “right to remain silent” actually contains two sub-rights: the right not to speak, and the right to cut off police questioning. The Court has never distinguished these as two separate rights - instead usually using the term “right to remain silent” for both - and has thus created confusion over what can be waived and what must be invoked. But when we separate the two rights, we see that a suspect can waive the right not to speak but must invoke the right to cut off questioning - a premise implicitly confirmed by both the majority and the dissent in Berghuis v. Thompkins.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 59

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: November 19, 2010 ; Last revised: March 22, 2013

Suggested Citation

Sacharoff, Laurent, Miranda's Hidden Right (February 21, 2011). Alabama Law Review, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1711410

Contact Information

Laurent Sacharoff (Contact Author)
University of Arkansas School of Law ( email )
260 Waterman Hall
Fayetteville, AR 72701
United States

Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,296
Downloads: 159
Download Rank: 126,914
Footnotes:  175

© 2015 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo4 in 0.375 seconds