less than 1 minute read

Oregon v. Mathiason

Significance, A Violation Of Miranda?, The Court Clarifies Miranda, Unfaithful To Miranda?, Impact


State of Oregon


Carl Ray Mathiason

Petitioner's Claim

That the Fifth Amendment right to be free from self-incrimination does not require police to give Miranda warnings to a person who is not under arrest and is not deprived of freedom of action.

Chief Lawyer for Petitioner

W. Michael Gillette

Chief Lawyer for Respondent

Gary D. Babcock

Justices for the Court

Harry A. Blackmun, Warren E. Burger, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist, Potter Stewart, Byron R. White (unsigned)

Justices Dissenting

William J. Brennan, Jr., Thurgood Marshall, John Paul Stevens


Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

25 January 1977


Law enforcement personnel need not read Miranda rights to a person before interviewing and receiving a confession from the person provided the person is not under arrest and is free to leave, even if the person is at a police station.

Related Cases

  • Miranda v. Arizona, 348 U.S. 436 (1966).
  • Michigan v. Tucker, 417 U.S. 433 (1974).
  • New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. 649 (1984).
  • Moran v. Burbine, 475 U.S. 412 (1986).
  • Withrow v. Williams, 507 U.S. 680 (1993).


Knappman, Edward W., ed. Great American Trials. Detroit, MI: Visible Ink Press, 1994.

Additional topics

Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1995 to Present