Prior to the Miranda v Arizona ruling in 1966, law enforcement could question possible suspects without their having legal counsel present. They could bully potential suspects, trick them, and do whatever else they thought was necessary to determine potential suspects’ involvement in a crime. The Miranda ruling protects people by allowing them to have legal counsel present when questioned by law enforcement regarding a crime in which they may or may not have been involved. This is a two-part assignment. Be sure to complete both parts.
In Part 1 of this assignment you are required to write a one- to two-page narrative in which you:
Summarize the Miranda Rule, including examples.
Explain exceptions to the Miranda Rule, including examples.
Develop a checklist with a series of questions to ask when assessing whether or not the Miranda Rule applies (for example, is your question a general one, such as name and date of birth? Or is it one that could make them vulnerable to prosecution?).
In Part 2 of this assignment, you are required to examine the scenarios contained in the Miranda Rule or Exception Template [DOCX].
Note: The first scenario is completed for you as an example to guide your work on the remaining nine scenarios.
For each scenario:
Determine for each scenario whether the Miranda Rule applies or an exception to it is in order.
Justify your determinations.
Use three sources to support your writing.
Choose sources that are credible, relevant, and appropriate.
Cite each source listed on your source page at least one time within your assignment.