Answer:
The Miranda v. Arizona decision taken by the United States Supreme Court in 1966 mandates that no defendant in police custody can make inculpatory or exculpatory statements admissible at trial if the defendant has not being informed of his or her right to legal counsel before and while being interrogated and his or her right against self-incrimination.
The name was taken from the particular case where the citizen, Ernesto Miranda, was charged with two crimes and signed a confession admitting to them; however, Miranda was at no point informed of his right to legal counsel and that his statements could be used against him. The case escalated to the Supreme Court with the consequences in jurisprudence so familiar to us nowadays.
