Duckworth v. Eagan

Duckworth v. Eagan, 492 U.S. 195 (1989), was a United States Supreme Court case dealing with police behavior when issuing the Miranda warning. The Court's decision was seen as weakening Miranda's protections.[1]

Duckworth v. Eagan
Argued March 29, 1989
Decided June 26, 1989
Full case nameJack R. Duckworth v. Gary James Eagan
Citations492 U.S. 195 (more)
109 S. Ct. 2875; 106 L. Ed. 2d 166
Holding
Informing a suspect that an attorney would be appointed for him "if and when you go to court" does not render Miranda warnings inadequate.
Court membership
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr. · Byron White
Thurgood Marshall · Harry Blackmun
John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor
Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy
Case opinions
MajorityRehnquist, joined by White, O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy
ConcurrenceO'Connor, joined by Scalia
DissentMarshall, joined by Brennan, Blackmun, Stevens
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. V

Background

After being questioned in regards to the stabbing of a woman, Gary Eagan was improperly read his Miranda Rights when police told him that he would be provided a lawyer "if and when you go to court." During the police investigation, Eagan did not make any incriminating statements, and waived his Miranda rights. The next day, Eagan was questioned again by police, and signed a waiver with the correct Miranda language. During the interrogation, Eagan confessed to the stabbing of the woman and revealed physical evidence of the crime committed. Later, Eagan claimed that the difference between the language in the first waiver he signed, and the second waiver he signed, made his confession inadmissible in a court of law.[2]

Opinion of the Court

Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote the opinion for the Court.[3] The Supreme Court held that it was not necessary that the warnings be given in the exact form described in the Miranda decision,[4] provided the warnings as a whole fully informed the suspect of his or her rights.[5]

gollark: Did you know? It was already too late. The bees had approached. GTech™ dominion over reality had begun, and none could escape. One night the bees reached the horizon of the sun, and all the specks began. The swarms of specks, all over the city, and even over the whole town. It would be next year that the bees reached the horizon on the night of December 14, 2011. After a week of resting they came to the end of October. They were too exhausted to continue their journey even upon midnight. In the morning they returned to the city to continue their "trip" that came along with the plague. The evening afternoon after dawn, they crossed to the eastern edge of the city, and began their journey on the night of December 15th. The next day, the bees went on their trip to the west of the city. They went on their journey along the northern coast with an aeroplane. When they arrived in the coast of the east of the city, they had a night sleep, as they had not come along the northern coast any further.
gollark: According to the osmarks.net™ future predictor cuboid™ you are actually.
gollark: Written in Macron, self-bootstrapping, and running literally everything optimally and hypermacronously.
gollark: As opposed to the upcoming MacronOS™.
gollark: Imagine utilizing Windows, especially 11.

References
  1. "Library/Abstracts". National Council Justice Referral Service. Retrieved January 1, 2012.
  2. "Duckworth v. Eagan, 492 U.S. 195". Oyez: US Supreme Court Media. Retrieved 5 October 2013.
  3. Duckworth v. Eagan, 492 U.S. 195 (1989).
  4. Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).
  5. (Chapter 5, page 141 of Criminal Investigation "Suspect's Response: Waiver And Alternatives; #4)

Further reading
  • Swanson; Chamelin; Territo; Taylor (2012). Criminal Investigation (Eleventh ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. ISBN 9780078111525.


This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.