Maryland v. Shatzer introduced which guideline concerning Miranda rights?

In the case of Maryland v. Shatzer, the Supreme Court established a significant guideline regarding the invocation of Miranda rights by introducing the "14-day rule." This rule states that if a suspect has previously been interrogated while in custody and then later released, they can be re-interrogated after a period of 14 days without needing to re-administer Miranda warnings. The rationale behind this guideline is to provide a timeframe that allows for the possibility of a suspect to regain their freedom and have a reasonable amount of time to weigh the implications of invoking their rights again.

This ruling helps to clarify the conditions under which law enforcement can re-initiate questioning after a suspect has been in custody and previously invoked their rights. The decision underscores the balance between protecting a suspect's constitutional rights and allowing law enforcement to investigate effectively within a defined framework. The 14-days serve as a cooling-off period during which a suspect has the opportunity to reflect on their prior experience and consider their willingness to engage in interrogation again.

The other options do not accurately reflect the specific holdings of Maryland v. Shatzer. For example, while invoking rights has its rules, there is technically no infinite time limit; the requirement for written consent isn't necessary standard practice following the Shat