Supreme Court of the United States
Arizona v. Mauro
May 4, 1987481 U.S. 520
Summary
The Court reversed the Arizona Supreme Court, holding that allowing Mauro to speak with his wife in the presence of a police officer did not constitute interrogation under Miranda and Innis, so the taped conversation was admissible. Justice Stevens dissented, arguing the police’s conduct was the functional equivalent of interrogation.
Holding
- Did the police officers’ decision to allow Mauro to converse with his wife in the presence of an officer constitute interrogation within the meaning of Miranda and Rhode Island v. Innis?. The Court held that the officers’ conduct did not rise to the level of interrogation; therefore the taped statements were admissible.
Docket 85-2121