California v. Prysock

453 U.S. 355 (1981)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

California v. Prysock

United States Supreme Court
453 U.S. 355 (1981)

Play video

Facts

Prysock (defendant) and a codefendant were suspects in the murder of Donna Iris Erickson. At the police station, Prysock was given the warnings required by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), and refused to speak. After Prysock’s parents arrived, Prysock agreed to be interrogated. The officer again gave Prysock all of the Miranda warnings, but did not follow the same formulation set forth in Miranda. In particular, the warning that Prysock had a right to have an attorney appointed for free came several warnings after the warning that Prysock had a right to consult with an attorney and have that attorney present during questioning. The trial court denied Prysock’s motion to suppress the interrogation. Prysock was tried by jury and convicted of first-degree murder. The appellate court reversed the conviction on the ground that the Miranda warnings were not sufficient and ordered a new trial. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)

Dissent (Stevens, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 820,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 820,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 820,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 989 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership