The decision specifies the procedural safeguards to be followed by police in the custodial interrogation of a person charged with a misdemeanor, as well as in the roadside questioning of a motorist detained in a routine traffic stop. Following a routine traffic stop, Richard McCarty was arrested on a misdemeanor charge. The arresting officer questioned McCarty after the arrest, without first giving a Miranda warning. The local court admitted McCarty's statements, holding that the Miranda rule did not apply to misdemeanor cases. On appeal, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a person subjected to custodial interrogation is entitled to the procedural safeguards enunciated in the Miranda decision, regardless of the severity of the offense involved. Moreover, the Court held that the roadside questioning of a motorist detained in a routine traffic stop does not constitute 'custodial interrogation' for the purposes of the Miranda rule, since the circumstances do not sufficiently impair the detainee's exercise of the privilege against self-incrimination to warrant the officer's stating the detainee's Miranda rights. Accompanying the video is a booklet that includes suggestions for using the video in a training session, highlights of the Supreme Court decision, a summary of the incident prompting the appeal, detailed facts of the case, and the rationale for the Supreme Court's decision.