The decision specifies that any statement made by a person during custodial police interrogation cannot, over his objection, be admitted in evidence against him as a defendant at trial, unless the police informed him of his Miranda rights before interrogation. Richard Mosley was arrested in connection with several robberies and given the Miranda warning. The officer began questioning Mosley about the robberies, but Mosley said he did not want to answer any questions about them; the officer ceased the interrogation. Later that evening, a second officer gave Mosley his Miranda rights and questioned him about a fatal shooting; Mosley implicated himself in the homicide and was subsequently charged and convicted. On appeal to the Michigan Court of Appeals, Mosley objected to the use of his incriminating statement as evidence; the court reversed the judgment of conviction and remanded the case for a new trial. The U.S. Supreme Court reviewed the case and found that the officers had acted properly and determined that the incriminating statement had properly been admitted as evidence. A booklet which accompanies the cassettes details the case and discusses the Supreme Court's decision.