Other Free Encyclopedias » Law Library - American Law and Legal Information » Notable Trials and Court Cases - 1989 to 1994

Pennsylvania v. Muniz - Significance, Exception From Miranda's Coverage, Exceptions Undermine Miranda, Impact

court evidence petitioner william

Petitioner

State of Pennsylvania

Respondent

Inocencio Muniz

Petitioner's Claim

That videotaped evidence should not be suppressed although Miranda warnings were not given.

Chief Lawyer for Petitioner

J. Michael Eakin

Chief Lawyer for Respondent

Richard F. Maffett, Jr.

Justices for the Court

Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Jr. (writing for the Court), Anthony M. Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia, John Paul Stevens, Byron R. White

Justices Dissenting

Thurgood Marshall

Place

Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

18 June 1990

Decision

The Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination relates only to evidence of a testimonial or communicative nature, not physical evidence.

Related Cases

  • Holt v. United States, 218 U.S. 245 (1910).
  • Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).
  • Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (1966).
  • Rhode Island v. Innis, 446 U.S. 291 (1980).
  • Doe v. United States, 487 U.S. 201 (1988).

Further Readings

  • Biskupic, Joan, and Elder Witt, eds. Congressional Quarterly's Guide to the U.S. Supreme Court, 3rd ed. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, Inc., 1996.
Penry v. Lynaugh - Significance, Supreme Court Finds Application Of Capital Punishment To The Mentally Retarded Constitutional, Impact, Further Readings [next] [back] Payne v. Tennessee - Significance, The Crime, The Trial, A Defendant's Rights, Further Readings

User Comments

Your email address will be altered so spam harvesting bots can't read it easily.
Hide my email completely instead?

Cancel or