Skip to main content
Workforce LibreTexts

15.5: Rhode Island v. Innis

  1. Last updated
  2. Save as PDF
  • Page ID
    16269

    • \( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \) \( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)\(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)\(\newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

    PETITIONER                                                                                RESPONDENT

    Rhode Island                                                                             Innis

    LOCATION

    Police Car

    DOCKET NO.                                                                                 DECIDED BY

    78-1076                                                                                     Burger Court

    LOWER COURT

    Rhode Island Supreme Court

    CITATION

    446 US 291 (1980)

    ARGUED

    Oct 30, 1979

    DECIDED

    May 12, 1980

    ADVOCATES

    John A. MacFadyen, III Argued the cause for the respondent

    Dennis J. Roberts, II Argued the cause for the petitioner

    Facts of the case

    After a picture identification by the victim of a robbery, Thomas J. Innis was arrested by police in Providence, Rhode Island. Innis was unarmed when arrested. Innis was advised of his Miranda rights and subsequently requested to speak with a lawyer. While escorting Innis to the station in a police car, three officers began discussing the shotgun involved in the robbery. One of the officers commented that there was a school for handicapped children in the area and that if one of the students found the weapon he might injure himself. Innis then interrupted and told the officers to turn the car around so he could show them where the gun was located.

    Question

    Did the police "interrogation" en route to the station violate Innis's Miranda rights?

    Conclusion

    6–3 Decision for Rhode Island Majority Opinion by Potter Stewart

    FOR

    AGAINST

    Blackmun

    White

    Powell

    Burger

    Stewart

    Rehnquist

    Marshall

    Brennan

    Stevens

    No. In a 6-to-3 decision, the Court held that the Miranda safeguards came into play "whenever a person in custody is subjected to either express questioning or its functional equivalent," noting that the term "interrogation" under Miranda included "any words or actions on the part of the police (other than those normally attendant to arrest and custody) that the police should know are reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response from the subject." The Court then found that the officers' conversation did not qualify as words or actions that they should have known were reasonably likely to elicit such a response from Innis.

    Contributors and Attributions

    This page titled 15.5: Rhode Island v. Innis is shared under a CC BY 4.0 license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Larry Alvarez via source content that was edited to the style and standards of the LibreTexts platform; a detailed edit history is available upon request.