California v. Prysock

This article only references primary sources. Please help improve this article by adding secondary or tertiary sources. Find sources: "California v. Prysock" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (September 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

California v. Prysock
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided June 29, 1981
Full case name	State of California v. Randall James Prysock
Citations	453 U.S. 55 (more)
Case history
Prior	Certiorari to the California Court of Appeal, Fifth District
Holding
There is no rule requiring that Miranda warnings need to be precise to withstand scrutiny as long as the warnings are effectual.
Court membership
Chief Justice Warren E. Burger Associate Justices William J. Brennan Jr. · Potter Stewart Byron White · Thurgood Marshall Harry Blackmun · Lewis F. Powell Jr. William Rehnquist · John P. Stevens
Case opinions
Majority	Burger, joined by Stewart, Powell, Rehnquist, Blackmun, Rehnquist
Dissent	Stevens, joined by Brennan, Marshall
Laws applied
Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution

California v. Prysock, 453 U.S. 55 (1981) was a per curiam United States Supreme Court case where the Court ruled that as long as the message of a Miranda warning was adequately communicated, it does not need to be precisely phrased.