Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Tekoh v. County of Los Angeles
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Tekoh v. County of Los Angeles
Do you wish to request the book?
Tekoh v. County of Los Angeles
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Tekoh v. County of Los Angeles
2022
Overview
The US court case Tekoh v. County of Los Angeles is discussed. The Ninth Circuit denied the petition for rehearing en banc, leaving intact the panel's holding that using an un-Mirandized statement at trial gives rise to section 1983 liability. Though the Ninth Circuit correctly denied en banc rehearing, the dissent's demotion of Miranda warnings from \"constitutionalize[d]\" to\"prophylactic\" is unjustified and risks restricting constitutional remedies at the Supreme Court and beyond.
Publisher
Harvard Law Review Association
Subject
