Florida v. Powell
Supreme Court of the United States
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Ginsburg
In a pathmarking decision, Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436, 471 (1966), the Court held that an individual must be “clearly informed,” prior to custodial questioning, that he has, among other rights, “the right to consult with a lawyer and to have the lawyer with him during interrogation.” The question presented in this case is whether advice that a suspect has “the right to talk to a lawyer before answering any of [the law enforcement officers’] questions,” and that he can invoke this right “at any time... during th[e] interview,” satisfies Miranda. We hold that it does.
I
On August 10, 2004,…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Coleman v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Rhode Island v. InnisSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Michigan v. LongSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Ohio v. RobinetteSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by212 opinions
- J. D. B. v. North CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Commonwealth v. ColavitaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
- Commonwealth v. MartinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
- Braddy v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2012
- Miller v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2010
207 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.