According to Miranda v. Arizona (1964), when is a defendant's statement admissible in court?

In the context of Miranda v. Arizona (1966), a defendant's statement is admissible in court if the prosecution can prove that the defendant was informed of their rights. The landmark decision established that individuals subjected to custodial interrogation must be made aware of their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and their Sixth Amendment right to counsel. This warning must be given before any questioning occurs to ensure that any statements made by the defendant are the result of informed and voluntary consent.

The requirement for informing a defendant of their rights ensures that they can make an educated choice on whether to speak to law enforcement or invoke their rights. If it can be established that the defendant was made aware of these rights and waived them knowingly and intelligently, then their statements can be admissible in court. This principle reinforces the importance of procedural safeguards to protect the rights of individuals in the justice system.