What rule did Miranda v. Arizona establish?

• A. Miranda Rule informing rights
• B. Double jeopardy protection
• C. Warrant requirement
• D. Exclusionary rule

Answer: (A)

The key idea here is that people must be told their rights before police question them when they’re in custody. Miranda v. Arizona established that before custodial interrogation, police must inform a person of the rights now known as the Miranda warnings: the right to remain silent, that anything they say can be used against them, and the right to have an attorney present. If they can’t afford an attorney, one will be provided. If the person asks for an attorney, interrogation must stop until the attorney is present. This rule is about making sure any statements given during questioning are voluntary and informed.

The other options refer to different constitutional protections that aren’t what Miranda established: double jeopardy protects against being tried twice for the same offense, the warrant requirement concerns searches and seizures with probable cause, and the exclusionary rule deals with suppressing illegally obtained evidence (not the warnings themselves).