Harris v. New York
Alleged Heroin Sale, Miranda V. Arizona, Testifying Against Oneself, Decision On Harris
State of New York
That Harris's constitutional rights had been violated, and thus his narcotics conviction should be overturned.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Joel Martin Aurnou
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
James J. Duggan
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, Warren E. Burger (writing for the Court), John Marshall Harlan II, Potter Stewart, Byron R. White
Hugo Lafayette Black, William J. Brennan, Jr., William O. Douglas, Thurgood Marshall
Date of Decision
24 February 1971
That statements considered inadmissible in convicting a defendant could be used to attack his or her credibility on the witness stand.
Narrowed suspects' rights in an attempt by a new conservative majority on the High Court to redress past liberal decisions.
- Walder v. United States, 347 U.S. 62 (1954).
- Blackburn v. Alabama, 361 U.S. 199 (1960).
- Townsend v. Sain, 372 U.S. 293 (1963).
- Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).
- Lego v. Twomey, 404 U.S. 477 (1972).
- Colorado v. Connelly, 479 U.S. 157 (1986).
- Dershowitz, Alan M. and John Hart Ely. "Harris v. New York: Some Anxious Observations on the Candor and Logic of the Emerging Nixon Majority." Yale Law Journal, Vol. 80, May 1971, pp. 1198-1227.
- Graham, Fred P. "Justices Narrow a Crime Decision by Warren Court." New York Times, February 25, 1971, p. 1.
- Harvard Law Review, Vol. 85, November 1971, pp. 44-64.
- Harrisburg Coalition Against Ruining the Environment v. Volpe - Significance, No Evidence Of Discriminatory Effect, Impact, Further Readings
- Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections - Significance, Further Readings
- Harris v. New York - Alleged Heroin Sale
- Harris v. New York - Miranda V. Arizona
- Harris v. New York - Testifying Against Oneself
- Harris v. New York - Decision On Harris
- Other Free Encyclopedias