Miranda Warnings and Terry Stops: Another Perspective
Eugene L. Shapiro
University of Memphis - Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law
Barry Law Review, Vol. 15, p. 1, 2010
University of Memphis Legal Studies Research Paper No. 113
The federal Courts of Appeals are now grappling with the issue of whether an investigative stop under Terry v. Ohio may sometimes involve a need for Miranda warnings. In 1984, the Supreme Court stated in Berkemer v. McCarty that warnings had always been deemed unnecessary during such encounters. Since then, Terry stops have permissibly involved increasingly coercive police practices which are often designed to ensure police safety. The issue of whether Miranda warnings may now be appropriate during some Terry stops has consequently developed.
While observers have focused upon whether the Court’s generalization in Berkemer has become outmoded, a very noticeable trend has emerged among the circuits which increasingly recognizes the appropriateness of Miranda warnings during some stops. This trend has been fueled by the influence of the Supreme Court’s “in custody” Miranda determinations in non-Terry contexts. This article examines the influence of the Court’s methodology upon developments concerning Miranda warnings and Terry stops.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 17Accepted Paper Series
Date posted: April 6, 2012
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo7 in 0.344 seconds