The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights and protects individuals from being compelled to be witnesses against themselves in criminal cases. 'No person...shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself,' which has been interpreted to mean that individuals have the right to refuse to answer questions from law enforcement officers that could incriminate them. This right is applicable during custodial interrogations and after an arrest. To invoke the right to remain silent, a person must explicitly state their intention to do so, as silence alone may not be sufficient to invoke the protections of the Fifth Amendment.
In the landmark case Miranda v. Arizona, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Fifth Amendment's protection against self-incrimination requires law enforcement officials to advise a suspect interrogated in custody of their rights to remain silent and to obtain an attorney. Suspects must be informed that they have the right to remain silent, that anything they say can be used against them in a court of law, that they have the right to the presence of an attorney, and that if they cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for them prior to any questioning if they so desire. Failure to provide a 'Miranda warning' to a suspect prior to custodial questioning generally leads to the exclusion of any statements made by the suspect from evidence in a criminal trial.
In Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, the Supreme Court held that statutes requiring a suspect to disclose his name during a police stop do not violate the Fourth Amendment if the stop is based on reasonable suspicion, nor do they violate the Fifth Amendment's prohibition on self-incrimination as long as the name disclosure does not have a reasonable possibility of incriminating the suspect. This decision means that while individuals are not required to answer questions that could incriminate them, they may be required to provide their name, address, and date of birth to a police officer during a lawful stop.
The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. It requires that any warrant for search or seizure be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. It is relevant in the context of police stops because it sets the standard for what constitutes a lawful detention or arrest. A stop and frisk, also known as a Terry stop, must be based on reasonable suspicion that a crime has been, is being, or is about to be committed. An arrest requires probable cause to believe that the individual has committed a crime. During a lawful stop, individuals must comply with police requests for identification but are not required to answer further questions without invoking their Fifth Amendment rights.