In Miranda v. Arizona, what rights must be communicated to criminal suspects before questioning?

In Miranda v. Arizona, the key outcome of the Supreme Court ruling established that suspects in custody must be informed of their rights to ensure their ability to make informed decisions during police interrogations. The rights specifically highlighted are the right to consult with an attorney and the right against self-incrimination.

Communicating the right to consult an attorney ensures that individuals who may not fully understand the legal implications of their situation have access to legal counsel. This is vital for protecting their interests and allows for adequate legal representation based on the complexities of the law. The right against self-incrimination is a protection guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment, meaning that individuals cannot be compelled to provide testimony that could incriminate them. This fundamental right upholds the principle that individuals should never be forced to confess or provide evidence against themselves.

By informing suspects of these rights, law enforcement aims to ensure voluntary and informed interactions, thereby upholding constitutional protections and fairness in the legal process.