This article was downloaded by: [UOV University of Oviedo]On: 22 October 2014, At: 07:57Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Journal of Ethnicity inSubstance AbusePublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wesa20

Perceptions About Changingthe Miranda Warnings AmongPolice ChiefsBrian K. Payne a & Victoria M. Time aa Department of Sociology and Criminal Justice , OldDominion University , Norfolk, VA, 23529, USAPublished online: 04 Oct 2008.

To cite this article: Brian K. Payne & Victoria M. Time (2005) Perceptions AboutChanging the Miranda Warnings Among Police Chiefs, Journal of Ethnicity in SubstanceAbuse, 3:4, 69-80, DOI: 10.1300/J233v03n04_05

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J233v03n04_05

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

7:57

22

Oct

ober

201

4

Perceptions About Changingthe Miranda Warnings Among Police Chiefs:

The Role of Race

Brian K. PayneVictoria M. Time

ABSTRACT. A number of studies have considered whether the raceof a police officer influences police decision-making processes. Thecurrent study assesses whether a police chief’s race influences per-ceptions about the Miranda warnings. Police chiefs from the Com-monwealth of Virginia completed questionnaires assessing variousaspects about the Miranda warnings when the fate of the warnings wasto be determined by the Supreme Court. Results suggest that race onlymoderately influenced chiefs’ perceptions. Implications are provided.[Article copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Ser-vice: 1-800-HAWORTH. E-mail address: <docdelivery@haworthpress.com>Website: <http://www.HaworthPress.com> © 2005 by The Haworth Press, Inc.All rights reserved.]

KEYWORDS. Miranda, race and crime, civil rights, police liability

In deciding Miranda v. Arizona, the United States Supreme Courttook into cognizance the fact that mere presence of a suspect at a policestation was intimidating enough that a fifth Amendment protection dur-ing interrogation was necessary. In order to ensure this protection, the

Brian K. Payne and Victoria M. Time are affiliated with the Department of Sociol-ogy and Criminal Justice, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA 23529.

Journal of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice, Vol. 3(4) 2005Available online at http://www.haworthpress.com/web/JECJ

2005 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.doi:10.1300/J222v03n04_04 69

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

7:57

22

Oct

ober

201

4

Court proffered the Miranda warnings and ruled that the warnings hadto be read to suspects during custodial interrogations. The warningsstipulate that suspects have the right to remain silent, and if they chooseto speak, their word could be held against them. Further, the warningsinform suspects of a right to an attorney and that in the event they cannotretain one, the government will provide one for them. Prior to theUnited States Supreme Court’s decision in Dickerson v. UnitedStates (2000) in which Miranda was upheld as the law of the land,speculation had mounted that Miranda would be overturned. Besidesa fifth Amendment guarantee against self-incrimination, and the ju-dicially created Miranda warnings, suspects are also protectedagainst coercive police practices by the fourth Amendment whichprohibits unreasonable searches and seizures.

The job of police officers is tedious and officers put their lives on theline whenever they are out on proactive or reactive policing. As such, itis necessary that officers be respected, and that the public cooperatewith them as much as possible in the execution of their jobs. In order forthese ideals to be attained, police officers themselves must treat citizensrespectfully, recognizing citizens’ civil liberties. Efforts to promote awholesome police working personality begins at recruitment and con-tinues throughout training. As part of their training, police officers aretutored on formal rules of criminal procedure, and the need to exercisegood judgment is impressed on them. However, occasionally, circum-stances arise whereby some overzealous officers exceed the scope oftheir authority by violating the civil rights of citizens. Violations of civilliberties may take several forms including breaching people’s constitu-tional rights as, for instance, engaging in unreasonable searches and sei-zures, coercing confessions, and the use of excessive force, amongothers. Police officers themselves consider forced confessions a seriousform of misconduct especially when physical force is utilized (Soo Son,Davis & Rome, 1998, pp. 25-26). Soo Son et al. contend that violationsof civil liberties are usually not racially motivated. Rather, the intransi-gence of suspects or their disrespect for officers may better explain po-lice “harshness” towards suspects. Since African Americans havenurtured “mistrust” against police because of previous experiences, theauthors suggest that African Americans are thus likely to be belligerent,and because police respond to belligerence with harshness, it followsthat African Americans will construe this as racial bias (pp. 26-27).

Four themes that arise from past research are relevant. First, researchsuggests that extralegal factors such as race significantly influence thejudicial response from all phases of the justice process, not just the po-

70 JOURNAL OF ETHNICITY IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

7:57

22

Oct

ober

201

4

lice (Barnes & Kingsnorth, 1996; Schissel, 1993). Second, researchconducted both immediately after the Miranda decision and recent find-ings suggest that police practices in terms of in-house interrogationswere not hindered in any significant way (Leo, 1996a,b; Payne & Time,2000; Time & Payne, 2000; Wald et al., 1967; Younger, 1966). Third, anumber of researchers are critical of Miranda’s impact on the groundsthat the ruling has done a disservice to fair and just law enforcement(Cassell, 1996; Cassell & Fowles, 1998; Cassell & Markman, 1995). Fi-nally, while Miranda did not “slow the police down,” research suggeststhat violations of citizens’ civil liberties especially the use of deadlyforce disproportionately impinge on African Americans (Fyfe, 1982;Geller & Scott, 1992; Sherman, 1995). As Geller and Scott (1992) note,police use of unreasonable force is more evident when the officer iswhite and the civilian is a minority. Sherman (1995, p. 155) posits that“although such patterns [higher rates for police homicides for blacks]are quite likely to vary from one city to the next, such a variation wouldsupport the argument that present procedures allow police homicide tobe administered in a discriminatory fashion.”

With regard to police practices during interrogations, violations ofcivil liberties may take the form of abuse or extensive coercion in effortsto extract confessions. While there is a dearth of research in this regardbecause interrogations are held in private, after spending over 500 hoursin 1996 listening to police interrogations and analyzing videotaped cus-todial interrogations, Richard Leo (1996a) made the following observa-tions among others: (1) very few interrogations are coercive; (2) one infive suspects invokes one or more of their Miranda rights to avoid coop-erating with the police; (3) interrogators use tactics advocated in policetraining manuals (fabricated evidence, “good guy-bad guy”) to under-mine the confidence of suspects and overbear their rational decisionmaking; and (4) interrogators have become increasingly skilled in elic-iting incriminating evidence during custodial interrogation. Soo Son etal. (1998) contend that contrary to expectations, after controlling forfactors such as offender’s prior engagement in violent offenses, policeofficers consider coerced confessions from African American suspectsa little more serious than when the confession is forced from a whitesuspect. Nonetheless, the authors surmise that citizen’s race played aminimal role after the police officers in their study assessed a variety ofpolice misconduct. More recently, research by Talley and his col-leagues (2005, p. 67) reports that other criminal justice professionalsalso “thought that the system was fair and equitable” in terms of raceand judicial processing.

Brian K. Payne and Victoria M. Time 71

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

7:57

22

Oct

ober

201

4

In discussing the perceptions of African American policewomen onprofessional relationships, Dodge and Pogrebin (2001) note that deal-ings between police and minorities is usually less amicable (see alsoAlex, 1969; Peak, 1997). For the most part, as Dodge and Pogrebin con-tend, black female officers are viewed with reservation and resentmentin disenfranchised communities. While this might be the case, the au-thors maintain that black officers who understand the problems of thosecommunities may be better equipped to tackle them than others whohave limited knowledge of the culture in those communities. They de-rive this conclusion by tapping into the perceptions of African Ameri-can police women. Further, as the authors determine based on theirinterviews with black female officers, the race of the officer influenceshow an officer responds to encounters between citizen and officer. Thefemale officers opine that black officers exercise more “respect and em-pathy” towards minorities. Even though the black female officers inDodge’s and Pogrebin’s study do not discuss if race influences policeperceptions about Miranda, it is reasonable to assume that in keepingwith their theme of fostering respect and understanding with membersof minority communities, they would be more likely to see the readingof the warnings as one way of preserving the civil liberties of minoritysuspects. As one black female officer states:

I kind of wanted to make a difference in our community and giveback to the community and also be a black person on the force whocares, because the people are always complaining about how thepolice mistreat them. I felt a black person on the departmentcould help stop whatever bad was going on. (Dodge & Pogrebin,2001, p. 557)

While none of the officers in Dodge’s and Pogrebin’s study had at-tained the rank of chief, it is not much of a stretch to assume that the sen-timents expressed by these officers are likely to stay constant even whenthey rise to the level of police chief. In Bolton’s study on the perceptionsof black officers about their jobs, one officer makes the point that:

Just like we are affected by what we see and experience and ourbackgrounds, I would think certainly a system that is run by hu-man beings is also affected by their life experiences, their percep-tions, and their beliefs. Certainly I think [policing is] infalliblebecause it’s run by human beings whose values and perceptionsand beliefs certainly enter into decisions that are made. (p. 387)

72 JOURNAL OF ETHNICITY IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

7:57

22

Oct

ober

201

4

If the officers in Bolton’s study maintain that as minorities they expe-rience institutional oppression based on their minority status, one caninfer that minority officers would be more inclined to support the use ofMiranda warnings.

The above studies do not provide any information on whether race in-fluences police decision making during interrogations. As well, giventhe recent thoughts about changing this civil liberty, research has notexamined whether officer race influences support or opposition to thewarnings. To fill this void in the literature, the current study examineswhether a police chief’s race influences his perceptions about theMiranda warnings.

METHODS

A survey was developed to measure the way police chiefs perceivedthe Miranda warnings. The survey included three sections. The firstsection was a demographic section and the second included threeopen-ended questions asking chiefs general questions about Miranda.Results from the open-ended questions have been discussed elsewhere(Payne & Time, 2001). The third section included a series of close-ended questions assessing respondents’ perceptions about specific as-pects of the warnings. The majority of these questions asked chiefs theirperceptions about certain aspects of Miranda. A general summary ofthe results from the close-ended questions has been presented elsewhere(Time & Payne, 2002).

The current study uses questions from the close-ended section to ex-amine whether race influenced the chief’s perceptions about the warn-ings. These close-ended questions included the following questions:

• In order to prevent the dismissal of a case, arresting officers mustroutinely read offenders their Miranda warnings.

• Police officers in my department routinely read offenders theMiranda warnings.

• Police officers receive enough training on ways to ensure the of-fender’s Miranda rights are protected.

• Courts are too cautious with regard to the Miranda warnings.• Too many offenders get off easy as a result of the Miranda warn-

ings.• The Supreme Court should overturn the Miranda warnings once

and for all.

Brian K. Payne and Victoria M. Time 73

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

7:57

22

Oct

ober

201

4

• The Miranda warnings are useful in principle but ineffective inpractice.

• The public has a misguided perception about the Miranda warn-ings.

• Most offenders already know their rights.• Many offenders think they are entitled to Miranda warnings even

during field investigations.• Abolishing Miranda warnings will change the way police officers

do their jobs.• The requirement to read suspects the Miranda warnings makes it

difficult for police to do their jobs.• Miranda warnings hinder voluntary confessions.• Many criminals confess voluntarily even after having been read

their Miranda warnings.• Prosecutors have a hard time proving cases in which defendants

have exercised their right to remain silent.• The requirement for Miranda warnings has not been an obstacle in

prosecuting criminal cases.

Response categories included strongly disagree, disagree, agree, andstrongly agree. These categories were collapsed into disagree and agree.Cross-tabulations were conducted to determine whether black policechiefs held Miranda in a different light than white police chiefs.

Sample

The survey was mailed to all police chiefs in the Commonwealth ofVirginia (n = 182). It is significant to note that the surveys were mailedwhile the fate of the warnings had not yet been decided by the SupremeCourt. Three weeks after the initial mailing, a follow-up post card wassent to all of the chiefs thanking those who had already completed thesurvey and encouraging the others to return the completed instrument.

Six surveys were returned unopened due to incorrect addresses.Ninety-seven police chiefs returned usable surveys, giving us a re-spected response rate of 55 percent. Two surveys arrived after the Su-preme Court had decided the fate of the warnings in the Dickerson case.Because the decision in Dickerson may have influenced these twochiefs’ opinions, we excluded their responses from the analysis. Table 1outlines the characteristics of the respondents.

As shown in the table, the majority of the chiefs were white males. Inall, nearly 97 percent of the chiefs were male (n = 92) and approxi-

74 JOURNAL OF ETHNICITY IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

7:57

22

Oct

ober

201

4

mately 90 percent were white (n = 86). The limited variation in gendermakes it impossible to examine its influence. There is enough racialvariation, however, to examine possible racial differences. The chiefstended to be older, with an average age of 48.6 years. The youngestchief was 27 years of age and the oldest was 64 years of age. Also notethat nearly half of the chiefs had a Bachelor’s degree or higher.

FINDINGS

Table 2 provides an overview of the role of race in influencing per-ceptions about the Miranda warnings. As shown in the table, for themost part, black and white police chiefs have similar attitudes aboutMiranda. Both groups tend to agree that their officers (1) are appropri-ately trained on how to use the warnings, (2) routinely read the warningsto offenders, and (3) are able to obtain a confession even after readingoffenders their rights. Both groups also tended to agree that the publichas a limited understanding of the warnings. The groups were equallymixed regarding concerns about preventing case dismissals and over-turning Miranda altogether.

Differences tended to arise on items concerned about the protectionof offenders’ rights rather than the administration of justice. Specifi-cally, black police chiefs differed from white police chiefs on fouritems. First, black police chiefs were less likely than white police chiefs

Brian K. Payne and Victoria M. Time 75

TABLE 1. Sample Demographics

Gender n %Male 92 96.8Female 3 3.2

RaceBlack 8 8.4White 86 90.5

Educational LevelHigh school 8 8.4Some college 42 44.2Bachelor’s or higher 45 47.3

AgeBelow 30 years 3 3.231-40 years 11 11.641-50 years 36 37.951-60 years 38 40.0Over 60 years 6 6.3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

7:57

22

Oct

ober

201

4

76 JOURNAL OF ETHNICITY IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE

TABLE 2. Perceptions About the Miranda Warnings by Race

Statement # ofwhites

agreeing

% ofwhites

agreeing

# ofblacks

agreeing

% ofblacks

agreeing

ChiSquare

Signif.

In order to prevent thedismissal of a case,arresting officers mustroutinely read offenderstheir Miranda warnings.

48 57.1 3 37.5 1.11 .243

Police officers in mydepartment routinelyread offenders theMiranda warnings.

81 94.2 8 100.0 .49 .634

Police officers receiveenough training on waysto ensure the offender’sMiranda rights areprotected.

78 90.7 8 100.0 .81 .477

Courts are too cautiouswith regard to theMiranda warnings.

55 64.7 2 25.0 4.86 .035

Too many offenders getoff easy as a result ofthe Miranda warnings.

39 45.9 1 12.5 3.39 .069

The Supreme Courtshould overturn theMiranda warnings onceand for all.

36 42.9 2 25.0 .96 .327

The Miranda warningsare useful in principlebut ineffective inpractice.

28 44.7 1 12.5 3.11 .078

The public hasmisguided perceptionsabout the Mirandawarnings.

77 90.6 6 75.0 1.85 .205

Most offenders alreadyknow their rights.

75 88.2 4 50.0 8.36 .016

Many offenders thinkthey are entitled toMiranda warnings evenduring fieldinterrogations.

79 94.0 6 75.0 3.77 .112

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

7:57

22

Oct

ober

201

4

to agree that the courts were overly cautious in using the warnings.Nearly two-thirds of white police chiefs agreed with this statement (n =55), as compared to just one-fourth of black police chiefs (n = 2).

Second, white police chiefs were more likely than black police chiefsto agree that most offenders already know their rights. In fact, nearlynine out of ten white police chiefs (n = 75) agreed with this statement. Incomparison, just half of the black police chiefs (n = 4) believed that of-fenders tended to know their rights.

Third, white police chiefs were more likely than black police chiefsto agree that the warnings hindered confessions. Over half of the whitepolice chiefs (n = 48) agreed that Miranda hindered confessions. In con-trast, just one (12.5%) of the black police chiefs believed the confes-sions were hindered because of the warnings.

Brian K. Payne and Victoria M. Time 77

Statement # ofwhites

agreeing

% ofwhites

agreeing

# ofblacks

agreeing

% ofblacks

agreeing

ChiSquare

Signif.

Abolishing the Mirandawarnings will change theway police officers dotheir jobs.

32 37.2 4 50.0 .507 .363

The requirement to readsuspects the Mirandawarnings makes itdifficult for police to dotheir jobs.

32 37.2 1 12.5 1.96 .156

Miranda warningshinder voluntaryconfessions.

48 55.8 1 12.5 5.51 .022

Many criminals confessvoluntarily even afterhaving been read theirMiranda warnings.

76 86.4 7 87.5 .005 .646

Prosecutors have a hardtime proving cases inwhich defendants haveexercised their right toremain silent.

39 49.4 1 12.5 3.98 .048

The requirement forMiranda warnings hasnot been an obstacle inprosecuting criminalcases.

38 48.1 6 75.0 2.10 .140

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

7:57

22

Oct

ober

201

4

Finally, white police chiefs were more likely to agree that prosecutorshave a difficult time proving cases when offenders exercise their rights.About half of the white police chiefs (n = 39) saw the use of this right ashindering the prosecution of the case. Alternatively, just one of the blackpolice chiefs (n = 12.5%) agreed that it is more difficult to prosecute casesin which the offender had exercised the right to remain silent.

Note that a number of other similar patterns, though statistically insig-nificant, emerged that suggested black chiefs were more likely to see thewarnings favorably. For instance, black police chiefs were less likely thanwhite police chiefs to agree that (1) too many offenders got off easily be-cause of the warnings, (2) the warnings are ineffective, and (3) successfulcase resolution hinges on the routine reading of the warnings.

DISCUSSION

The current study considered whether black and white police chiefsvaried in their perceptions about the Miranda warnings. Although thechiefs were similar in many ways, important differences between thetwo groups suggest that race may play a role in fostering perceptionsabout the Miranda warnings. The general pattern uncovered was thatblack police chiefs may be more concerned about protecting offenders’rights than are white police chiefs. This finding had been alluded to inan earlier study. In that study, a black female police officer stated: “Ithink that having a black background you have better insight as to whyor how they [citizens] react whereas my white counterpart may not beable to see that” (Dodge & Pogrebin, 2001, p. 556). This is not to sug-gest that white police chiefs are not concerned with offenders’ rights;rather, it is to suggest that the two groups may define these rights quali-tatively differently. Based on these findings, important implications forpolicy and research emerge.

Three policy implications arise from our findings. First, given thecomplex legal changes that consistently evolve in the justice system, it isimportant to recognize that racial differences among practitioners may in-hibit the effective implementation of those legal changes. Indeed, police of-ficer attitudes are likely tied to their practices in the field (Tonry, 1999).Past research suggesting that Miranda was not used as it was intended to beused supports this assertion (Leiken, 1970; Milner, 1971; Robinson, 1968;Wasby, 1976). If officers are opposed to certain civil liberty extensionsor restrictions, then any change could be resisted and ineffective. At atime when the U.S. Patriot Act has redefined the scope of offenders’civil rights, the implications of such a possibility are astounding.

78 JOURNAL OF ETHNICITY IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

7:57

22

Oct

ober

201

4

Second, assuming that the differences uncovered here reflect culturaldifferences, efforts should be made to educate the public about the ap-propriateness of the warnings. If whites tend to think of the warnings asexisting solely to get criminals off, then efforts to extend civil libertiesmay face the greatest opposition among the white population.

Third, although white and black police chiefs agree that officers al-ready receive enough training about the warnings, a variation of theirtraining about the warnings should include some aspect of increasingofficers’ understandings of citizens’ perceptions of the warnings. Howvarious kinds of citizens define the warnings will truly influence theiractions with officers. As well, how officers define the warnings will in-fluence the police/citizen encounter. Essentially, officers must be awarethat individuals interpret the constitutional rights they will be protectingdifferently. What this infers is that offenders and fellow officers may actdifferently in certain situations. Being prepared for these differenceswill allow officers to better ensure the fair application of the warnings.

A few limitations warrant caution in interpreting our findings. First,focusing on chiefs from just one state, which has historically been con-servative in terms of offenders’ rights, limits the generalizability of ourfindings. Second, our small number of black police chiefs is problem-atic and also limits generalizability. In addition, attitudes of policechiefs may indeed be different from attitudes and practices of line offi-cers. Certainly, practices are more important than perceptions and wewere unable to tap into actual practices in this study.

Despite these limitations, or perhaps because of these limitations, anumber of questions remain for future research. Are there regional vari-ations in chiefs’ perceptions about Miranda? Second, we have focusedon just one civil liberty. Are there differences in the ways that black andwhite police chiefs perceive other constitutional protections? Do lineofficers perceive the rights differently? Are perceptions tied to actions?How do officers view the U.S. Patriot Act? These and other questionswarrant future research.

REFERENCES

Alex, H. (1969). Black and Blue, Appleton, Century, Crofts, New York.Barnes, C.W., & Kingsnorth, R. (1996). Race, drug, and criminal sentencing. Journal

of Criminal Justice, 24, 39-55.Bolton, K. (Jr). (2003). Shared perceptions: Black officers discuss continuing barriers

in policing. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management,26(3), 386-399.

Brian K. Payne and Victoria M. Time 79

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

7:57

22

Oct

ober

201

4

Cassell, P. (1996). Miranda’s social costs: An empirical reassessment. NorthwesternUniversity Law Review, 90, 387-427.

Cassell, P., & Fowles, R. (1998). Handcuffing the cops? A thirty year perspective onMiranda’s harmful effects on law enforcement. Stanford Law Review, 50,1055-1145.

Cassell, P., & Markman, S.J. (1995). Miranda’s hidden costs. National Review, 47,30-33.

Dodge M., & Pogrebin M. (2001). African-American policewomen: An exploration ofprofessional relationships. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategiesand Management, 24(4), 550-562.

Fyfe, J. (1982). Blind justice: Police shootings in Memphis. Journal of Criminal Lawand Criminology, 73, 214-280.

Leiken, L.S. (1970). Police interrogation in Colorado: The implementation ofMiranda. Denver Law Journal, 47, 1-53.

Leo, R. (1996a). Inside the interrogation room. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminol-ogy, 86, 266-303.

Leo, R. (1996b). The impact of Miranda revisited. Journal of Criminal Law and Crimi-nology, 86, 621-92.

Payne, B.K., & Time, V. (2000). Police chiefs’ support of Miranda: A qualitativestudy. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 25(1), 65-76.

Peak, K. (1997). African Americans in policing. In Dunham, R. and Alpert, G. (Eds.),Critical Issues in Policing, Waveland Press, Prospect Heights, IL, 356-62.

Robinson, C.D. (1968). Police and prosecutor practice and attitudes relating to interro-gation as revealed by pre- and post-Miranda questionnaires: A construct of policecapacity to comply. Duke Law Journal, 3, 425-524.

Schissel, B. (1993). A sociolegal analysis of Canadian youth justice. Journal of Crimi-nal Justice, 21(6), 533-552.

Sherman, L. (1995). The police. In J.Q. Wilson and J. Petersilia (Eds.), Crime, pp. 327-348. San Francisco, CA: Institute for Contemporary Studies.

Son, I.S., Davis, M., & Rome, D. (1998). Race and its effect on police officers’ percep-tions of misconduct. Journal of Criminal Justice, 26(1), 21-28.

Talley, C.R., Rajack-Talley, T., & Tewksbury, R. (2005). Knowledge and perceptions ofjuvenile justice officials about selection bias. Journal of Criminal Justice, 33, 67-75.

Time, V., & Payne, B.K. (2002). Police chiefs’ views about Miranda: An analysis ofsurvey data. Journal of Criminal Justice, 30(1), 77-86.

Wald, M., Ayers, R., Hess, D., Schantz, M., & Whitebread, C. II. (1967). Interrogationsin New Haven: The impact of Miranda. Yale Law Journal, 76, 1519-1648.

Weitzer, R. (2000). White, black, or blue cops? Journal of Criminal Justice, 28,313-324.

Younger, E. (1966). Results of a survey conducted in the District Attorney’s Office ofLos Angeles County regarding the effect of the Miranda decision upon the prosecu-tion of felony cases. American Criminal Law Quarterly, 32, 30-54.

Submitted: May 2004Resubmitted: March 2005

Accepted: April 2005

80 JOURNAL OF ETHNICITY IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

7:57

22

Oct

ober

201

4