Law

1 September, 02:31

In Escobedo v. Illinois (1964), the Supreme Court held that:

a. no Miranda warning is required during a stop and frisk.

b. Miranda does not need to be given by private police.

c. an individual being investigated by police may not be denied counsel.

d. indigent defendants are entitled to a lawyer when seeking an appeal.

+3

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Not Sure About the Answer?

Find an answer to your question 👍 “In Escobedo v. Illinois (1964), the Supreme Court held that: a. no Miranda warning is required during a stop and frisk. b. Miranda does not ...” in 📗 Law if the answers seem to be not correct or there’s no answer. Try a smart search to find answers to similar questions.

Search for Other Answers

You Might be Interested in

Where in the constitution is the veto power described

Ethical questions can seem subjective because:

What is shyannes middle name

1 Select the correct answer. How long is a term for a US senator? A. two years B. four years C. six years D. eight years

1. How can an impression be classified as circumstantial evidence, class evidence, and non-circumstantial (individual) evidence?

New Questions in Law

What is the last step on the process of getting a bill passed

Is it possible that a distinct lower-class culture exists?

What is the difference between exclusive jurisdiction and concurrent jurisdiction

Expedia, a third-party online travel-booking company proposed an acquisition of Orbitz, another third-party online travel-booking company.

Why are most criminal cases settled without going to trial?