Annually, more than 1.5 million juvenile offenders are arrested and routinely Mirandized with little consideration regarding the comprehensibility of these warnings. The current investigation examined 122 juvenile Miranda warnings from across the United States regarding their length, reading level, and content. Even more variable than general Miranda warnings, juvenile warnings ranged remarkably from 52 to 526 words; inclusion of Miranda waivers and other material substantially increased these numbers (64 -1,020 words). Flesch-Kincaid reading estimates varied dramatically from Grade 2.2 to postcollege. Differences in content included such critical issues as (a) right to parent/guardian input, (b) specification of free legal services for indigent defendants, and (c) statements of right to counsel in conditional terms. Recommendations for simplified juvenile Miranda warnings are presented.
In its landmark decision in Miranda v. Arizona (1966), the Supreme Court of the United States buttressed the Constitutional privilege against self-incrimination by requiring as a procedural safeguard that various aspects of this privilege be clearly communicated to custodial suspects. Members of the public often believe that their continually media-fueled familiarity with Miranda warnings results in an adequate understanding of Miranda rights-a frequently erroneous assumption that may diminish counsel's motivation to investigate Miranda waivers and may influence court rulings on the validity of such waivers. The current investigation examined Miranda rights misconceptions held by two groups of pretrial defendants: those arrested more recently (i.e., less than 2 weeks ago) and those arrested less recently (i.e., 4 weeks ago or more). The misconceptions of these groups were then contrasted with those of undergraduate students representing a more educated and comparatively unstressed segment of American society. Results revealed a host of widely-held misconceptions, including a fundamental misunderstanding of the function of the "right to remain silent" as a legal protection. Moreover, many misconceptions appeared unrelated to intelligence, education, or prior contacts with the criminal justice system. The implications of these findings are discussed with respect to the validity of Miranda waivers.
Miranda vocabulary forms the essential foundation for Miranda comprehension and subsequent decisions to exercise or waive Miranda rights. The purpose of the current study is the development of the Miranda Vocabulary Scale (MVS), designed to evaluate key vocabulary words found in Miranda warnings and waivers across American jurisdictions. A preliminary list of MVS words was refined by expert ratings and by each word's discriminability between failed and good Miranda comprehension. Miranda and other measures were collected at multiple sites on 376 pretrial defendants. With further refinements, the MVS is composed of 36 words with excellent scale homogeneity and interrater reliability (r = .99). It also demonstrated good convergent and discriminant validity for cognitive abilities and psychological impairment.
The American Bar Association, via its newly adopted policy, seeks fundamental changes in procedural justice with respect to juvenile Miranda warnings. It calls for understandable Miranda warnings to educate youth in custody regarding the relevant Constitutional protections. In surveying prosecutors and public defenders, the authors collected 293 juvenile Miranda warnings that are intended specifically for youthful offenders. Length and reading levels were analyzed and compared to an earlier survey. Nearly two thirds (64.9%) of these warnings were very long (> 175 words), which hinders Miranda comprehension. In addition, most juvenile warnings (91.6%) require reading comprehension higher than a 6th-grade level; 5.2% exceed a 12th-grade reading level. Combining across two surveys, more than half of juvenile Miranda warnings are highly problematic because of excessive lengths or difficult reading comprehension. However, simple and easily read Miranda components were identified that could be used to improve juvenile advisements. Breaking new ground, Miranda waivers were examined for both juveniles and their parents/interested adults. Interestingly, most juvenile versions emphasized waivers in positive terms (e.g., "an opportunity") and downplayed the potential for negative consequences.
Spanish-translated Miranda warnings are administered annually to thousands of Hispanic custodial suspects. In examining 121 Spanish translations and their English counterparts from 33 states, the lengths of Miranda warnings were generally comparable but marked differences were observed in the reading levels for individual Miranda components. The adequacy of Miranda translations varies markedly from minor variations to substantive errors. The most serious problems involved the entire omission of Miranda components; several omissions were observed in the Spanish translations for even the basic rights to silence and counsel. More commonly, Miranda discrepancies involved dissimilar content with a substantial trend toward more information in English than Spanish versions. Findings related to the Miranda translations, different word lengths, and varied reading levels are discussed using the totality of circumstances as its framework.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.