From our private database of 35,400+ case briefs...
Pennsylvania v. Muniz
United States Supreme Court
496 U.S. 582, 110 S. Ct. 2638, 110 L. Ed. 2d 528 (1990)
Facts
Muniz (defendant) was arrested for driving while intoxicated. After failing three roadside sobriety tests and admitting that he had been drinking, Muniz was taken to a booking center. At the booking center, Muniz’s interactions with the police were videotaped and he was told that he was being recorded. Muniz was asked a series of questions, the last of which was, “Do you know what the date was of your sixth birthday?” Muniz, slurring his speech, answered “No, I don’t.” Police had Muniz repeat the physical sobriety tests from earlier in the evening, during which he made further incriminating statements. Muniz was asked to submit to a breathalyzer test and refused. It was not until this point that Muniz was advised of his Miranda rights. At trial, the recording of his interactions with the police at the booking center were admitted into evidence and an officer testified concerning the sobriety tests and incriminating statements. Muniz was convicted of driving while intoxicated. Muniz filed a motion for a new trial, which was denied. The case was eventually appealed to the United States Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Brennan, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Rehnquist, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 617,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,400 briefs, keyed to 984 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.
