What is the current state of the law in the context of the Miranda rights test?

A person interrogated by law enforcement officers after being taken into custody must first be warned that he has a right to remain silent, that any statement he does make may be used as evidence against him and that he has a right to the presence of an attorney, either retained or appointed. (Miranda, supra, 384 U.S. 436.) Statements taken in violation of this rule are generally inadmissible. (Stansbury v. California (1994) 511 U.S. 318, 322.) The Miranda decision was premised on the perception that interrogation of a suspect in police custody is inherently coercive. (Miranda, at pp. 445-458.) To insure that any statement the suspect makes in that setting is a product of his free will, the

Page 8