Final answer:
The AEDPA imposes strict time limits and procedural restrictions for death row inmates to file federal habeas corpus petitions, narrowing their chances to challenge convictions. It has affected the ability to file collateral attacks in federal court. The Miranda rule mandates notifying individuals of their Fifth Amendment rights before police interrogation, and failure to do so can result in a constitutional violation.
Step-by-step explanation:
The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) is a federal statute that has significant implications for death row litigants seeking to file collateral attacks, specifically habeas corpus petitions, through which they challenge their convictions or sentences in federal court after exhausting state court remedies.
This legislation imposed strict new time limits on the filing of federal habeas corpus petitions, significantly limited the ability of federal courts to grant relief on the basis of new rules of law, and added restrictions on the granting of a new hearing based on claims of actual innocence. Thus, it has had the effect of narrowing the window within which death row inmates can challenge their convictions and sentences in federal court and has increased the procedural difficulties and complexities of such legal efforts.
In relation to police interrogation practices, the Fifth Amendment protects individuals from self-incrimination, and the Miranda decision requires that individuals must be informed of their rights, including the right to counsel, before an interrogation. Failure to notify individuals of these rights can indeed result in a violation of the Fifth Amendment, making the resultant statements inadmissible in court.