Juvenile Miranda Warnings: Comprehension and Understanding of Constitutional Safeguards

每年有100多万青少年犯罪嫌疑人被逮捕和拘留。在任何供词或其他陈述之前，他们必须被告知宪法赋予的权利，即通过米兰达警告来防止自证其罪。青少年警告在其呈现方式（即口头，书面或两者兼而有之）和阅读水平上各不相同。利用具有代表性的青少年米兰达警告，这个项目是第一个研究青少年对是否行使宪法权利的决策理解和应用程度的项目。该项目使用了两个相关样本：接受少年司法替代教育的高危青少年和在押少年。该项目还调查了对米兰达警告的一些误解，这些误解可能会使任何关于宪法保护的理性推理无效。例如，许多青少年认为他们的沉默可以被用作有罪的证据，这可能会影响他们是否与警察交谈的决定。研究了米兰达误解的两个方面：(1)他们最初的信念和(2)由于米兰达化而产生的任何改进。该研究对公共政策和上诉法院判决具有深远的影响。2010年，美国律师协会（American Bar Association）认识到，向青少年嫌疑人提供他们无法理解的米兰达警告是一个全国性问题。该项目应通过查明目前在青少年咨询管理方面的问题来协助他们的倡议。美国最高法院最近判决了几起案件，这些案件确立了根据青少年的成熟程度和智力发展情况对他们进行不同对待的原则。2011年，美国最高法院直接处理了青少年米兰达问题，认为青少年嫌疑人不是“微型成年人”，年龄是考虑米兰达豁免有效性的相关因素。目前的研究将有助于告知州和联邦法院关于为少年犯提供额外米兰达保护的可能性。

More than a million juvenile suspects are arrested annually and taken into custody. Prior to any confessions or other statements, they must be informed of their Constitutional rights against self-incrimination via Miranda warnings. Juvenile warnings vary in how they are presented (i.e., oral, written, or both) and in their reading levels. Using representative juvenile Miranda warnings, this project is the first to examine how much juveniles understand and apply to their decision-making about whether to exercise their Constitutional rights. The project uses two relevant samples: at-risk youth in juvenile justice alternative education and juvenile detainees in custody. The project also investigates several misconceptions about Miranda warnings that can nullify any rational reasoning about Constitutional protections. For example, many adolescents believe that their silence can be used as incriminating evidence, which might affect their decision whether to talk to police. Two aspects of Miranda misconceptions are studied: (1) their initial beliefs and (2) any improvements as a result of being Mirandized.This research has far-reaching implications for public policy and appellate court decisions. In 2010, the American Bar Association recognized the national problem of providing juvenile suspects with Miranda warnings they could not understand. This project should assist their initiative for by identifying current problems in the administration of juvenile advisements. The U.S. Supreme Court has recently decided several cases, which established that juveniles be dealt with differently in light of their maturity and intellectual development. In 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court directly addressed juvenile Miranda issues, holding that juvenile suspects are not "miniature adults" and that age is relevant in considering the validity of Miranda waivers. The current research will help to inform the state and federal courts regarding the potential provision of additional Miranda protections for juvenile offenders.