Skip to main content
Loy. U. Chi. L.J.
  • Menu
  • Articles
    • Articles
    • Book Review
    • Case Comments
    • Case Notes
    • Colloquium Articles
    • Commentaries
    • Comments
    • Conference Articles
    • Conference Essays & Remarks
    • Dedications
    • Developments
    • Essays
    • General
    • Mentorship Articles
    • Non-Colloquium Articles
    • Non-Colloquium Essay
    • Non-Conference Contributions
    • Notes
    • Prefatory Matter
    • Speeches
    • Symposium Articles
    • All
  • For Authors
  • Editorial Board
  • About
  • Issues
  • History
  • Membership
  • Masthead
  • Symposiums
  • Subscriptions
  • search

RSS Feed

Enter the URL below into your favorite RSS reader.

http://localhost:59151/feed
Case Comments
Vol. 3, Issue 1, 1972January 01, 1972 CDT

Criminal Law - Statement Inadmissable Against a Defendant in the Prosecution’s Case in Chief Because of Lack of the Procedural Safeguards Required by Miranda v. Arizona, May, if Its Trustworthiness Satisfies Legal Standards, Be Used for Impeachment Purposes to Attack the Credibility of the Defendant’s Trial Testimony

Ronald V. Hirst,
Copyright Logoccby-4.0
Photo by Wesley Mc Lachlan on Unsplash
Loy. U. Chi. L.J.
Ronald V. Hirst, Criminal Law - Statement Inadmissable Against a Defendant in the Prosecution’s Case in Chief Because of Lack of the Procedural Safeguards Required by Miranda v. Arizona, May, If Its Trustworthiness Satisfies Legal Standards, Be Used for Impeachment Purposes to Attack the Credibility of the Defendant’s Trial Testimony, 3 Loy. U. Chi. L.J. 169 (1972).
Save article as...▾

View more stats

This website uses cookies

We use cookies to enhance your experience and support COUNTER Metrics for transparent reporting of readership statistics. Cookie data is not sold to third parties or used for marketing purposes.

Powered by Scholastica, the modern academic journal management system