Investigating Miranda waiver decisions: An examination of the rational consequences

被引:10
作者
Blackwood, Hayley L. [1 ]
Rogers, Richard [1 ]
Steadham, Jennifer A. [1 ]
Fiduccia, Chelsea E. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ N Texas, Denton, TX 76203 USA
关键词
Miranda; Miranda rights; Waiver decisions; Standardized assessment of Miranda abilities; WARNINGS; COMPETENCE; COMPREHENSION; ADOLESCENTS; TRIAL;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijlp.2015.08.002
中图分类号
D9 [法律]; DF [法律];
学科分类号
0301 ;
摘要
Millions of custodial suspects waive their Miranda rights each year without the benefit of legal counsel. Miranda understanding, appreciation, and reasoning abilities are essential to courts' acceptance of Miranda waivers (Grisso, 2003; Rogers 82 Shuman, 2005). The question posed to forensic psychologists and psychiatrists in the disputed Miranda waivers is whether a particular waiver decision was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary. Despite the remarkable development of Miranda research in recent decades, studies have generally focused on understanding and appreciation of Miranda rights, but with comparatively minimal emphasis on Miranda reasoning and attendant waiver decisions. Research on defendants' decisional capacities constitutes a critical step in further developing theoretical and clinical models for Miranda waiver decisions. The current study evaluated Miranda waiver decisions for 80 pretrial defendants from two Oklahoma jails to study systematically how rational decision abilities affect defendants' personal waiver decisions. In stark contrast to what was expected, many defendants were able to identify a rational decisional process in their own legal cases, yet cast such reasoning aside and chose a completely contradictory Miranda waiver decision. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:11 / 18
页数:8
相关论文
共 33 条
[1]  
Blackwood H. L., 2013, THESIS
[2]  
Bonnie R.J., 1993, U MIAMI L REV, V47, P539
[3]   THE COMPETENCE OF CRIMINAL DEFENDANTS - A THEORETICAL REFORMULATION [J].
BONNIE, RJ .
BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES & THE LAW, 1992, 10 (03) :291-316
[4]   Improving comprehension of jury instructions with audio-visual presentation [J].
Brewer, N ;
Harvey, S ;
Semmler, C .
APPLIED COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, 2004, 18 (06) :765-776
[5]   Outcome expectancies and risk-taking behavior [J].
Fromme, K ;
Katz, EC ;
Rivet, K .
COGNITIVE THERAPY AND RESEARCH, 1997, 21 (04) :421-442
[6]   An Investigation of Implied Miranda Waivers and Powell Wording in a Mock-Crime Study [J].
Gillard, Nathan D. ;
Rogers, Richard ;
Kelsey, Katherine R. ;
Robinson, Emily V. .
LAW AND HUMAN BEHAVIOR, 2014, 38 (05) :501-508
[7]  
Goldstein N.E., 2012, Miranda Rights Comprehension Instruments (MRCI)
[8]   The competence of adolescents as trial defendants [J].
Grisso, T .
PSYCHOLOGY PUBLIC POLICY AND LAW, 1997, 3 (01) :3-32
[9]  
Grisso T., 2003, EVALUATING COMPETENC, V2nd
[10]  
Grisso T., 1981, JUVENILES WAIVER MIR