Page 178 - Legal Guide DEMO

LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO

LLRMI - DEMO
LLRMI - DEMO
LLRMI - DEMO
LLRMI - DEMO Task: Miranda Warnings and Questioning LLRMI - DEMO
LLRMI - DEMO

Arizona v. Mauro, 481 U.S. 520 (1987).

LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO
Where an officer knows or should know that his or her words or
conduct are likely to elicit an incriminating response from the

suspect who is in custody; questioning has occurred irrespective of

whether any express questions have been posed.
LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO
•
Incriminating statements made by the suspect in response to a
police officers words or conduct under these circumstances will only
be admissible in the prosecution’s case where the requirements of

Miranda have been met.
LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO
See also, Rhode Island v. Innis, 446 U.S. 291 (1980).

Examples:

• Confronting one suspect with the confession of a co-conspirator.
LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO
Confronting suspect with autopsy photos.
•

177
©2020 Jack Ryan Legal & Liability Risk Management Institute
LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO LLRMI - DEMO