453 U.S. 355 (1981)
The respondent a minor was arrested for murder. The officer advised the respondent of his Miranda rights. The respondent declined to talk. After the respondent's parent's arrived, the respondent was again advised of his rights. At this time the respondent gave a statement, which was used at his trial. The appellate court held that the respondent was not properly advised of his right to counsel during the interrogation.
- The Court held that the rigidity of Miranda did not extend to the precise formulation of the warnings given.
- The Court found that the respondent was informed of his right to have a lawyer present prior to and during interrogation and that he could have one appointed if could not afford one.
- The Court held that the appellate court erred because it was clear that the respondent's Miranda rights were fully conveyed.
The Court reversed the judgment from the appellate court, which reversed the respondent's murder conviction, and remanded the case for further proceedings.
Recommended Supplements for Criminal Procedure Criminal Procedure: Examples & Explanations, Sixth Edition
Emanuel Law Outline: Criminal Procedure