About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

33 Ariz. St. L.J. 387 (2001)
Miranda Thirty-Five Years Later: A Close Look at the Majority and Dissenting Opinions in Dickerson

handle is hein.journals/arzjl33 and id is 403 raw text is: MIRANDA THIRTY-FIVE YEARS LATER: A Close Look at the Majority and Dissenting Opinions in Dickerson* Yale Kamisart Over the years, Miranda v. Arizona' has been criticized both for going too far' and for not going far enough. Nevertheless, on the basis of talks with many criminal procedure professors in the sixteen months between the time a panel of the Fourth Circuit upheld a statute (18 U.S.C. § 3501) purporting to overrule Miranda and a 7-2 majority of the Supreme Court overturned that ruling in the case of Dickerson v. United States,4 I am convinced that most criminal procedure professors wanted the Supreme Court to do what it did-reaffirm Miranda. This is not surprising. As Professor Grano once observed, a person need only attend academic conferences on criminal procedure to discover how discrete and insular 'conservatives' are in academia.' However, I think all the many professors teaching criminal procedure realized that we would be in much greater demand if the Fourth Circuit's ruling were to be upheld by the Supreme Court-if the centerpiece of the Warren Court's revolution in American criminal procedure were to be eradicated by the Rehnquist Court. For in such an event the resulting confusion would have been enormous-and we would have been popping up * This Article was the basis for the 2001 Willard Pedrick Lecture delivered at the Arizona State University College of Law on April 5, 2001. t Clarence Darrow Distinguished University Professor, University of Michigan Law School; Visiting Professor, University of San Diego Law School. I am indebted to Marc Spindelman for his helpful suggestions. 1. 384 U.S. 436 (1966). 2. See, e.g., JOSEPH D. GRANO, CONFESSIONS, TRUTH, AND THE LAW 199-222 (1993); Gerald M. Caplan, Questioning Miranda, 38 VAND. L. REV. 1417, 1419 (1985); Fred E. Inbau, 'Playing God': 5 to 4 (The Supreme Court and the Police), 57 J. CRiM. L. CRIMINOLOGY & POL. Sci. 377, 377 (1966). 3. See, e.g., Francis A. Allen, The Judicial Quest for Penal Justice: The Warren Court and the Criminal Cases, 1975 U. ILL. L. F. 518, 537-38; Charles J. Ogletree, Are Confessions Really Good for the Soul?: A Proposal to Mirandize Miranda, 100 HARv. L. REV. 1826, 1842-45 (1987); Irene Merker Rosenberg & Yale L. Rosenberg, A Modest Proposal for the Abolition of Custodial Confessions, 68 N.C. L. REV. 69, 110 (1989). 4. 120 S. Ct. 2326 (2000), rev'g 166 F.3d 667 (4th Cir. 1999). 5. Joseph D. Grano, Introduction-The Changed and Changing World of Constitutional Criminal Procedure, 22 U. MICH. J.L. REFORM 395, 398 n.12 (1989).

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most