Keywords

Vega v. Tekoh; Criminal Justice; Fifth Amendment; Ernesto Miranda

Abstract

This thesis examines whether the protections established in Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), remain robust within contemporary criminal justice practice or have been weakened through doctrinal and practical developments. Miranda warnings were originally designed to mitigate the risk that coercive custodial interrogation would produce compelled or unreliable self-incrimination. Since 1966, however, both judicial interpretation and evolving law-enforcement practices have created a growing gap between Miranda’s formal legal promise and its practical operation in real-world interrogations.

The study evaluates the erosion of Miranda’s protective force through three primary mechanisms. First, doctrinal developments have narrowed Miranda’s scope by redefining critical triggers such as custody and interrogation, expanding exceptions such as the public safety doctrine, and increasing the formal requirements for invoking constitutional rights. Second, interrogation practices and compliance gaps have reduced the meaningfulness of warnings and waivers, particularly through sophisticated psychological strategies that may maintain formal adherence to Miranda while undermining its substantive protections. Third, remedial contraction has weakened enforcement and deterrence, especially following Vega v. Tekoh, 597 U.S. ___ (2022), which limited the availability of civil damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for Miranda violations, diminishing accountability for noncompliance.

Methodologically, this study combines structured doctrinal analysis of United States Supreme Court and select state appellate decisions with a synthesis of peer-reviewed research on Miranda comprehension, waiver decision-making, and false confessions. The project also incorporates a pilot survey of students from a Southeastern University, designed to measure baseline understanding of Miranda rights and common misconceptions identified in the literature. The survey is framed as an illustrative measure of public legal knowledge rather than a direct proxy for custodial decision-making, and it is presented with clear methodological limitations and IRB compliance.

The analysis concludes that while Miranda remains formally embedded in constitutional criminal procedure, its effective protective force has weakened due to the combined influence of doctrinal narrowing, strategic interrogation practices, and reduced remedial mechanisms. The thesis identifies evidence-supported reform options, including mandatory interrogation recording, youth-specific procedural safeguards, improved comprehension measures for warnings, and policy interventions aimed at mitigating the post-Vega remedies gap. Throughout, the study clearly distinguishes empirical findings from normative recommendations, offering a comprehensive assessment of the contemporary strength and vulnerabilities of Miranda rights.

Thesis Completion Year

2026

Thesis Completion Semester

Spring

Thesis Chair

Milon, Abby

College

College of Community Innovation and Education

Department

Legal Studies

Thesis Discipline

Legal Studies

Language

English

Access Status

Open Access

Length of Campus Access

None

Campus Location

UCF Downtown

Download

Share

COinS
 

Accessibility Statement

This item was created or digitized prior to April 24, 2027, or is a reproduction of legacy media created before that date. It is preserved in its original, unmodified state specifically for research, reference, or historical recordkeeping. In accordance with the ADA Title II Final Rule, the University Libraries provides accessible versions of archival materials upon request. To request an accommodation for this item, please submit an accessibility request form.