Mincey v. Arizona
Citations
- 437 U.S. 385
- 98 S. Ct. 2408
- 57 L. Ed. 2d 290
- 1978 U.S. LEXIS 115
About this case
Mincey v. Arizona — U.S. Supreme Court case. This entry links to the full opinion in the CourtListener corpus.
Editorial context from Wikipedia (CC-BY-SA 4.0).
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that involuntary statements, as opposed to statements made in technical violation of Miranda, could not even be admitted for impeachment purposes
- holding that involuntary statements, as opposed to statements made in technical.violation of Miranda, could not even be admitted for impeachment purposes
- holding that statements taken in violation of Miranda are not admissible for any purpose where they were involuntary or the product of coercion
- holding that while statements obtained in violation of Miranda may be used for impeachment if otherwise trustworthy, the Constitution prohibits “any criminal trial use against a defendant of his involuntary statement”
- holding that statements obtained as result of defendant’s will being overborne “cannot be used in any way against a defendant at his trial”
- holding that statements obtained as result of defendant's will being overborne \cannot be used in any way against a defendant at his trial\
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Stewart, Burger, Brennan, White, Marshall, Blacicmun, Powell, Stevens, Rehnquist
Read full opinion on CourtListenerOther cases named Mincey v. Arizona
6 other CourtListener records share this case name.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.