NCJ Number
139240
Journal
Criminal Justice Journal Volume: 13 Issue: 2 Dated: (Spring 1992) Pages: 357-366
Date Published
1992
Length
10 pages
Annotation
The United States Supreme Court's decision in Pennsylvania v. Muniz supported the admission into evidence of a videotape of a Pennsylvania drunk-driving suspect's booking, thereby reducing the fifth amendment protections provided in the Miranda decision.
Abstract
The Court overturned a lower court decision by holding that the admission of the videotaped evidence did not violate the Miranda rule, except for the petitioner's response to one question regarding his sixth birthday. Muniz argued that the videotape should have been suppressed due to its incriminatory nature and that he had not received the Miranda warning before being videotaped. Such a videotape makes everyone in the courtroom privy to the investigative process. However, individuals experience great psychological pressure during the filming process. Moreover, although typical roadside traffic stops do not qualify as custodial interrogation for the purposes of the Miranda rule, the potential repercussions from the videotaping of any subsequent field sobriety tests indicate the need to apply the privilege against self-incrimination. Finally, potential future advances in technology mean that care must be used in setting precedents on these issues. Footnotes