| Garrity v. New Jersey | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Supreme Court of the United States |
||||||
| Argued November 10, 1966 Decided January 16, 1967 |
||||||
| Full case name | Garrity v. New Jersey | |||||
| Holding | ||||||
| Where police officers being investigated were given choice either to incriminate themselves or to forfeit their jobs under New Jersey statute on ground of self-incrimination, and officers chose to make confessions, confessions were not voluntary but were coerced, and Fourteenth Amendment prohibited their use in subsequent criminal prosecution in state court. | ||||||
| Court membership | ||||||
|
||||||
| Case opinions | ||||||
| Majority | Douglas, joined by Warren, Black, Brennan, Fortas | |||||
| Dissent | Harlan, joined by Clark, Stewart | |||||
| Dissent | White | |||||
| Laws applied | ||||||
| U.S. Const. Amend. V., U.S. Const. Amend. XIV | ||||||
Garrity v. New Jersey, 385 U.S. 493 (1967),[1] was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that law enforcement officers and other public employees have the right to be free from compulsory self-incrimination. It gave birth to the Garrity warning, which is administered by federal agents to suspects in internal and administrative investigations in a similar manner as the Miranda warning is administered to suspects in criminal investigations.