ABSTRACT
One issue that continues to generate increasing attention from neuropsychologists is a defendant's comprehension of Miranda rights and the defendant's ability to waive them "knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily" (Miranda v. Arizona, 1966). Given that confessions remain the most compelling type of evidence (Kassin & Neumann, 1997), determining whether a client validly waived his or her rights to silence and counsel before making self-incriminating statements becomes critically important. Individuals with brain dysfunction, learning disabilities, or low intelligence may have difficulty understanding "intelligently" the abstract purpose of the Miranda statement. Because of their intellectual and emotional immaturity, juveniles are especially at risk for poor comprehension and false confessions (i.e., admitting to crimes they did not commit; Oberlander, Goldstein, & Ho, 200 I). Adolescent defendants and adults with brain dysfunction may not fully comprehend the etlect of the waiver and thus may have difficulty meeting the "intelligent" requirement for a valid waiver. Neuropsychological paradigms can provide a profile of cognitive deficits and strengths that may assist in the assessment of an individual's ability to understand forensic issues (Zillmer, 2003 a, 2005). Thus, from a neuropsychological perspective there are correlates in the cognitive domain to the Miranda concepts of "knowingly" and "intelligently" that should allow for promising research and appropriate clinical applications. Other emerging issues in the criminal domain of interest to neuropsychologists are in the area of assisting with sentencing, options. Particularly in capital sentencing neuropsychologists can assist by providing a picture of the defendant's neuropsychological functioning.
