We are independent & ad-supported. We may earn a commission for purchases made through our links.

Advertiser Disclosure

Our website is an independent, advertising-supported platform. We provide our content free of charge to our readers, and to keep it that way, we rely on revenue generated through advertisements and affiliate partnerships. This means that when you click on certain links on our site and make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn more.

How We Make Money

We sustain our operations through affiliate commissions and advertising. If you click on an affiliate link and make a purchase, we may receive a commission from the merchant at no additional cost to you. We also display advertisements on our website, which help generate revenue to support our work and keep our content free for readers. Our editorial team operates independently from our advertising and affiliate partnerships to ensure that our content remains unbiased and focused on providing you with the best information and recommendations based on thorough research and honest evaluations. To remain transparent, we’ve provided a list of our current affiliate partners here.

What is a Miranda Warning?

Mary McMahon
By
Updated May 17, 2024
Our promise to you
WiseGeek is dedicated to creating trustworthy, high-quality content that always prioritizes transparency, integrity, and inclusivity above all else. Our ensure that our content creation and review process includes rigorous fact-checking, evidence-based, and continual updates to ensure accuracy and reliability.

Our Promise to you

Founded in 2002, our company has been a trusted resource for readers seeking informative and engaging content. Our dedication to quality remains unwavering—and will never change. We follow a strict editorial policy, ensuring that our content is authored by highly qualified professionals and edited by subject matter experts. This guarantees that everything we publish is objective, accurate, and trustworthy.

Over the years, we've refined our approach to cover a wide range of topics, providing readers with reliable and practical advice to enhance their knowledge and skills. That's why millions of readers turn to us each year. Join us in celebrating the joy of learning, guided by standards you can trust.

Editorial Standards

At WiseGeek, we are committed to creating content that you can trust. Our editorial process is designed to ensure that every piece of content we publish is accurate, reliable, and informative.

Our team of experienced writers and editors follows a strict set of guidelines to ensure the highest quality content. We conduct thorough research, fact-check all information, and rely on credible sources to back up our claims. Our content is reviewed by subject matter experts to ensure accuracy and clarity.

We believe in transparency and maintain editorial independence from our advertisers. Our team does not receive direct compensation from advertisers, allowing us to create unbiased content that prioritizes your interests.

In the legal system of the United States, a Miranda warning is a warning given by police to people in custody who are about to be questioned to make sure that the subject of the questioning understands his or her legal rights. One important thing to note is that people do not have to be formally arrested to be “Mirandized,” as people say when they refer to giving a Miranda warning. In most situations where someone is in custody and will be questioned, meaning that she or he is deprived of liberty by the police, the rights discussed in the warning apply. An exception to this rule is a request for identification, which may be made without issuing a Miranda warning.

A famous Supreme Court case, Miranda v Arizona, established the need for the Miranda warning. This 1966 case revolved around someone who was accused of a crime and was not aware of his legal rights, most particularly his rights under the Fifth Amendment. During questioning he made a confession and this was used against him in court. The Supreme Court ruled that law enforcement have an obligation to make sure that people know and understand their legal rights before being questioned, and that evidence obtained without such a warning may not be valid in court. If a person requests an attorney and is questioned anyway, any information obtained will be considered invalid for use in court.

There are several components to a Miranda warning. One is a restatement of the right protected by the Fifth Amendment: The right to remain silent. People are not required to answer questions which would be personally incriminating. Another right is the right to an attorney and the right to have an attorney present during questioning. People must also be made aware of the fact that if they cannot afford an attorney, one can be appointed.

Another critical part of the Miranda warning is a reminder that statements made during questioning can be used in court. People must also understand that while they can waive the right to have an attorney present during questioning, they may invoke this right and stop the interview at any time. If law enforcement officers are working with people who are not United States citizens, they must also make these individuals aware that they have a right to contact their consulates for assistance.

It has been determined that simply providing the Miranda warning is not enough. It must also be established that the subject understood the warning. Once warned, people are asked to communicate that they understand or to request clarification. If the subject does not understand, the Miranda warning must be presented in a way which is understandable. This may require the services of an interpreter or the use of simple language for people who have difficulty understanding the more formal Miranda warning.

A similar concept is the Garrity or Kalkines warning, a warning given to federal employees who cooperate in internal investigations.

WiseGeek is dedicated to providing accurate and trustworthy information. We carefully select reputable sources and employ a rigorous fact-checking process to maintain the highest standards. To learn more about our commitment to accuracy, read our editorial process.
Mary McMahon
By Mary McMahon

Ever since she began contributing to the site several years ago, Mary has embraced the exciting challenge of being a WiseGeek researcher and writer. Mary has a liberal arts degree from Goddard College and spends her free time reading, cooking, and exploring the great outdoors.

Discussion Comments

By Logicfest — On Oct 09, 2014

@Soulfox -- Because criminals have a reputation for not being truthful, the best thing to do when giving a Miranda Warning is to record it if possible and at least have another officer present to witness the warning and the arrested person's acknowledgment that they understand their rights.

If a criminal tries the "nuh-uh" defense by claiming he never got Mirandized, then some proof will be needed to counter that accusation. Think about it. Who will a jury believe? Someone accused of a crime or a couple of officers?

The answer to that question if pretty obvious.

By Soulfox — On Oct 08, 2014

This article touches on one of the main problems with the Miranda Warning. What is someone gets arrested and charged with a crime only to turn around and tell his or her attorney that they did not understanding their rights or never received the Miranda Warning at all?

I'm not saying a criminal would lie through his teeth in order to avoid going to jail, but that has been known to happen.

Mary McMahon

Mary McMahon

Ever since she began contributing to the site several years ago, Mary has embraced the exciting challenge of being a...

Learn more
WiseGeek, in your inbox

Our latest articles, guides, and more, delivered daily.

WiseGeek, in your inbox

Our latest articles, guides, and more, delivered daily.