Which Supreme Court case required police to inform suspects of their rights before custodial interrogation?

• A. Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
• B. Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)
• C. Escobedo v. Illinois (1964)
• D. Warren v. Florida (1948)

Answer: (A)

The main concept here is the procedural safeguard that police must inform a suspect of their rights before custodial interrogation. In Miranda v. Arizona, the Court held that when a person is in custody and being questioned, law enforcement must give clear warnings about the right to remain silent, that anything said can be used against them, and the right to an attorney, with an appointed attorney if they cannot afford one. The suspect’s waiver of these rights must be voluntary, knowing, and intelligent. This case established the famous "Miranda rights" and made statements obtained without these warnings generally inadmissible in court, ensuring suspects understand and consciously waive their protections.

This case is the best answer because it directly created the requirement for those warnings before custodial interrogation. Related cases differ in focus: Gideon v. Wainwright guarantees the right to counsel at trial, not the pre-interrogation warnings; Escobedo v. Illinois dealt with access to counsel during interrogation but did not establish the full warnings regime; Warren v. Florida addressed coerced confessions and due process rather than the warning model.