Duckworth v. Eagan
Jack R. Duckworth
Gary James Eagan
That the respondent's rights were not violated simply because police officers failed to follow the exact wording of Miranda during the interrogation process.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
David Michael Wallman
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Howard B. Eisenberg
Justices for the Court
Anthony M. Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, William H. Rehnquist (writing for the Court), Antonin Scalia, Byron R. White
Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Jr., Thurgood Marshall, John Paul Stevens
Date of Decision
26 June 1989
Respondent's Miranda rights were not violated, even if they were not delivered to the respondent exactly as written in Miranda. The Court held that Miranda rights are not prescriptive inasmuch as they express a means by which law enforcement can ensure that the rights of a suspect are not infringed upon when gathering probative evidence.
- Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).
- Stone v. Powell, 428 U.S. 465 (1976).
- California v. Prysock, 453 U.S. 355 (1981).
- Biskupic, Joan, and Elder Witt, eds. Congressional Quarterly's Guide to the U.S. Supreme Court, 3rd ed. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, Inc., 1996.
- Hall, Kermit L., ed. The Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States. New York: Oxford Press, 1992.
- East Bibb Twiggs Neighborhood Association v. Macon-Bibb County Planning and Zoning Commission - Significance, Commission's Decision Not Racially Motivated, Impact, "not In My Back Yard"
- DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services - "undeniably Tragic", Who Was Protecting Joshua?, Impact, The Custody Battle, Further Readings
- Duckworth v. Eagan - Significance
- Duckworth v. Eagan - Impact
- Other Free Encyclopedias