An Entity of Type: unit of work, from Named Graph: http://dbpedia.org, within Data Space: dbpedia.org

Missouri v. Seibert, 542 U.S. 600 (2004), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that struck down the police practice of first obtaining an inadmissible confession without giving Miranda warnings, then issuing the warnings, and then obtaining a second confession. Justice David Souter announced the judgment of the Court and wrote for a plurality of four justices that the second confession was admissible only if the intermediate Miranda warnings were "effective enough to accomplish their object." Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in a concurring opinion that the second confession should be inadmissible only if "the two-step interrogation technique was used in a calculated way to undermine the Miranda warning."

Property Value
dbo:abstract
  • Missouri v. Seibert, 542 U.S. 600 (2004), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that struck down the police practice of first obtaining an inadmissible confession without giving Miranda warnings, then issuing the warnings, and then obtaining a second confession. Justice David Souter announced the judgment of the Court and wrote for a plurality of four justices that the second confession was admissible only if the intermediate Miranda warnings were "effective enough to accomplish their object." Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in a concurring opinion that the second confession should be inadmissible only if "the two-step interrogation technique was used in a calculated way to undermine the Miranda warning." (en)
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
dbo:wikiPageID
  • 3430036 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageLength
  • 10377 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
  • 1120627013 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbp:arguedate
  • 0001-12-09 (xsd:gMonthDay)
dbp:argueyear
  • 2003 (xsd:integer)
dbp:case
  • Missouri v. Seibert, (en)
dbp:concurrence
  • Kennedy (en)
  • Breyer (en)
dbp:decidedate
  • 0001-06-28 (xsd:gMonthDay)
dbp:decideyear
  • 2004 (xsd:integer)
dbp:dissent
  • O’Connor (en)
dbp:findlaw
dbp:fullname
  • Missouri, Petitioner v. Patrice Seibert (en)
dbp:holding
  • Missouri's practice of interrogating suspects without reading them a Miranda warning, then reading them a Miranda warning and asking them to repeat their confession is unconstitutional. (en)
dbp:joindissent
  • Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas (en)
dbp:joinplurality
  • Stevens, Ginsburg, Breyer (en)
dbp:justia
dbp:lawsapplied
dbp:litigants
  • Missouri v. Seibert (en)
dbp:oyez
dbp:parallelcitations
  • 172800.0
dbp:plurality
  • Souter (en)
dbp:prior
  • 25920.0
dbp:uspage
  • 600 (xsd:integer)
dbp:usvol
  • 542 (xsd:integer)
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dcterms:subject
rdf:type
rdfs:comment
  • Missouri v. Seibert, 542 U.S. 600 (2004), is a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that struck down the police practice of first obtaining an inadmissible confession without giving Miranda warnings, then issuing the warnings, and then obtaining a second confession. Justice David Souter announced the judgment of the Court and wrote for a plurality of four justices that the second confession was admissible only if the intermediate Miranda warnings were "effective enough to accomplish their object." Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in a concurring opinion that the second confession should be inadmissible only if "the two-step interrogation technique was used in a calculated way to undermine the Miranda warning." (en)
rdfs:label
  • Missouri v. Seibert (en)
owl:sameAs
prov:wasDerivedFrom
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
foaf:name
  • (en)
  • Missouri, Petitioner v. Patrice Seibert (en)
is dbo:wikiPageRedirects of
is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink of
is foaf:primaryTopic of
Powered by OpenLink Virtuoso    This material is Open Knowledge     W3C Semantic Web Technology     This material is Open Knowledge    Valid XHTML + RDFa
This content was extracted from Wikipedia and is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License