HomeCase briefs › Criminal Procedure

New York v. Quarles

Supreme Court of the United States · 1984 · Criminal Procedure
Criminal ProcedureFifth AmendmentMirandapublic safety exceptioncustodial interrogationMiranda warningspublic safetyunwarned statements

Facts

The Court treated respondent as having been in custody and subjected to interrogation before Miranda warnings were given. During that unwarned questioning, respondent made the statement, "the gun is over there," and the police recovered a gun as a result. The case involved the admissibility of both the unwarned statement and the gun. The majority concluded that overriding considerations of public safety justified admission of evidence secured without prior warnings.

Issue

Whether evidence obtained from custodial interrogation without prior Miranda warnings is admissible when overriding considerations of public safety are present, and whether both the unwarned statement and the gun may be admitted.

Rule

There is a public safety exception to Miranda under which overriding considerations of public safety can justify admission of evidence obtained through custodial questioning conducted without first administering Miranda warnings.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

  • The court's holding and reasoning
  • Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
  • 10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case
Sign up free to see more →
Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.
Police in Phoenix arrest Devin Cole in a crowded bus terminal after a witness says he tucked a loaded pistol under a seat moments earlier. Before giving warnings, an officer asks, "Where is the gun?" Devin points to a nearby trash bin, and officers recover it.

Are Devin's unwarned statement and the gun most likely admissible in the prosecution's case-in-chief?

Explanation. The majority recognized a public safety exception to Miranda. When officers confront an immediate safety risk and ask a narrow question aimed at neutralizing that danger, the absence of warnings does not require exclusion of the unwarned answer or the physical evidence recovered as a result. Here, the risk that a loaded gun could be found in a crowded terminal supplies the overriding public safety concern.