October Term 2003 · Docket 02-1371
Does an early unwarned statement taint a later warned confession?
Missouri seeks to admit a later confession. The defendant argues the first unwarned statement poisoned the second.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Missouri's counsel argued the later statement is admissible if preceded by warnings.
The defendant's counsel argued the first unwarned statement taints the second.
The Court asked about good faith mistakes and coercive pressures.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 37-15 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 37-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 23-15 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 23-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 17-27 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 17-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 29-33 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 29-33
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The Court must decide if a police officer's failure to give Miranda warnings before an initial statement automatically makes a subsequent warned statement inadmissible. the side that brought the case argues the later statement stands alone. the opposing side argues the first statement taints the second.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 37-15 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 37-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 23-15 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 23-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 17-27 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 17-27
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on December 9, 2003.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 29-33 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 29-33
What each side wants
Missouri wants the Court to admit the later warned confession.
The defendant wants the Court to exclude the later confession.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 37-15 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 37-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 23-15 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 23-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 17-27 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 17-27
What each side says
Missouri argues an unwarned statement does not presumptively taint a later warned statement.
The defendant argues an unwarned statement cannot be used to prove guilt.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 37-15 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 37-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 23-15 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 23-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 17-27 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 17-27
What the justices asked
Chief Justice Rehnquist asked if a good faith mistake avoids coercive pressures.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 29-33 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 29-33
Why it matters
This case defines when police can use a later confession after an initial warning failure. It shapes how courts evaluate the admissibility of sequential statements. It impacts the balance between police procedure and defendant rights.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 37-15 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 37-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 23-15 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 23-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 17-27 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 17-27
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 29-33 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 29-33
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 37-15 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 37-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 23-15 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 23-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 17-27 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 17-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 37-15 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 37-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 23-15 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 23-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 17-27 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 17-27
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.