HR1072LRB099 20818 RLC 45554 r

1
HOUSE RESOLUTION

 
2    WHEREAS, Police interrogation raises challenging legal
3questions because of the important but competing interests
4these practices implicate; and
 
5    WHEREAS, Confessions by guilty suspects aid the police in
6solving crimes and promoting public safety; but the desire to
7secure a confession can invite abusive police practices, and
8these practices can undermine valued individual rights, and
9even prompt innocent persons to confess; and
 
10    WHEREAS, The Fifth Amendment to the United States
11Constitution made applicable to the states by the Fourteenth
12Amendment provides that (n)o person shall be compelled in any
13criminal case to be a witness against himself (or herself); and
 
14    WHEREAS, June 13, 2016 marks the 50th anniversary of the
15landmark United States Supreme Court decision of Miranda v.
16Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966); and
 
17    WHEREAS, The decision holds that when an individual is
18taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his or her freedom
19by the authorities in any significant way and is subjected to
20questioning, he or she must be warned prior to any questioning
21that he or she has the right to remain silent, that anything he

 

 

HR1072- 2 -LRB099 20818 RLC 45554 r

1or she says can be used against him or her in a court of law,
2that he or she has the right to the presence of an attorney
3during police questioning, and that if he or she cannot afford
4an attorney one will be appointed for him or her prior to any
5questioning if he or she so desires and that he or she must be
6given the opportunity to exercise these rights throughout the
7interrogation; after the warnings have been given, and the
8opportunity afforded him or her, the individual may knowingly
9and intelligently waive these rights and agree to answer
10questions or make a statement; but unless and until the
11warnings and waiver are demonstrated by the prosecution at
12trial, no evidence obtained as a result of interrogation can be
13used against him or her; and
 
14    WHEREAS, Despite some limitations placed on the
15applicability of the Miranda decision by the United States
16Supreme Court over the past 50 years, the ruling remains a
17significant constitutional decision in our system of criminal
18justice; and
 
19    WHEREAS, The Miranda ruling checks the power of police to
20coerce their way to a confession from the suspect; and
 
21    WHEREAS, The Miranda ruling reinforces the fundamental
22principle that all individuals retain critical rights when in
23police custody, and that police must work within these rights

 

 

HR1072- 3 -LRB099 20818 RLC 45554 r

1when interrogating a suspect; and
 
2    WHEREAS, This principle reinforces our nation's commitment
3to the rule of law, even when the State is pursuing interests
4as important as criminal justice and public safety; therefore,
5be it
 
6    RESOLVED, BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE
7NINETY-NINTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, that we
8celebrate the landmark 1966 United States Supreme Court
9decision of Miranda v. Arizona.