Dickerson v. United States
E47190
Dickerson v. United States is a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court case that reaffirmed the constitutional basis of Miranda warnings and held that Congress could not overrule Miranda v. Arizona by statute.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Dickerson v. United States canonical | 3 |
Statements (47)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
constitutional law case ⓘ criminal procedure case ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination
ⓘ
exclusionary rule ⓘ police interrogation ⓘ |
| arguedDate | 2000-04-19 ⓘ |
| chiefJusticeAtTimeOfDecision | William H. Rehnquist ⓘ |
| citation |
120 S. Ct. 2326
ⓘ
147 L. Ed. 2d 405 ⓘ 530 U.S. 428 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvision |
Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
ⓘ
Fourteenth Amendment ⓘ
surface form:
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
|
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decidedDate | 2000-06-26 ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 2000-06-26 ⓘ |
| dissentingOpinionBy | Antonin Scalia ⓘ |
| docketNumber | 99-5525 ⓘ |
| holding |
18 U.S.C. § 3501 is unconstitutional to the extent it conflicts with Miranda
ⓘ
Miranda v. Arizona announced a constitutional rule that Congress may not supersede by statute ⓘ statements taken without Miranda warnings are generally inadmissible in the prosecution’s case-in-chief ⓘ |
| impact |
limited congressional power to overrule constitutional criminal procedure decisions
ⓘ
reaffirmed the requirement that law enforcement give Miranda warnings before custodial interrogation ⓘ |
| joinedByInDissent | Clarence Thomas ⓘ |
| joinedByInMajority |
Anthony M. Kennedy
ⓘ
David H. Souter ⓘ John Paul Stevens ⓘ Ruth Bader Ginsburg ⓘ Sandra Day O’Connor ⓘ Stephen G. Breyer ⓘ |
| jurisdiction |
federal judiciary of the United States
ⓘ
surface form:
United States federal courts
|
| languageOfOpinion | English ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
constitutional status of Miranda warnings
ⓘ
validity of 18 U.S.C. § 3501 ⓘ whether Congress could overrule Miranda v. Arizona by statute ⓘ |
| majorityOpinionBy | William H. Rehnquist ⓘ |
| originatingCourt | United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ⓘ |
| petitioner | Charles Thomas Dickerson ⓘ |
| relatedCase |
Michigan v. Tucker
ⓘ
Miranda v. Arizona ⓘ New York v. Quarles ⓘ Oregon v. Elstad ⓘ |
| respondent |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| reversedOrAffirmed | reversed the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ⓘ |
| statuteInQuestion | 18 U.S.C. § 3501 ⓘ |
| term | October Term 1999 ⓘ |
Referenced by (3)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.