ABSTRACT
The Miranda rule holds that evidence obtained by the police during custodial interrogation of a suspect is not admissible in court to prove guilt unless the suspect was given the “Miranda warnings” and there was a valid waiver by the suspect. There are, of course, exceptions to this rule. Arguably, the most significant of these cases is Edwards v. Arizona, in which the Supreme Court held that an accused who, after having been given the Miranda warnings, invokes the right to remain silent and to have a lawyer present, cannot be interrogated further for the same crime until a lawyer is made available. The cases in this chapter on Confessions and Admissions: Cases Affirming Miranda are Edwards v. Arizona and Dickerson v. United States.
