<Tr> <Th> Dissent </Th> <Td> White, joined by Harlan, Stewart </Td> </Tr> <Tr> <Th_colspan="2"> Laws applied </Th> </Tr> <Tr> <Td_colspan="2"> U.S. Const . amends . V, XIV </Td> </Tr> <P> Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court . In a 5--4 majority, the Court held that both inculpatory and exculpatory statements made in response to interrogation by a defendant in police custody will be admissible at trial only if the prosecution can show that the defendant was informed of the right to consult with an attorney before and during questioning and of the right against self - incrimination before police questioning, and that the defendant not only understood these rights, but voluntarily waived them . </P>

What resulted from the supreme court's ruling in miranda v. arizona (1966) (4 points)