Translate This
Miranda Rights and Law Enforcement: What is Permissible to Use in Court? | Jake Brower, Attorney At Law |Criminal Lawyer | Criminal Defense |DUI Defense Attorney |Felony Arrests |3-Strike Cases |Santa Ana, Orange County, CA

Criminal Law

  • Miranda Rights and Law Enforcement: What is Permissible to Use in Court?

    Posted Sep 5th, 2014 By in Criminal Law, Miranda Rights With | Comments Off on Miranda Rights and Law Enforcement: What is Permissible to Use in Court?

    In today’s world of crime dramas and cop shows, it may be easy to mix up the legal jargon and hard to decipher what happens in real life in these scenarios. One of the common themes in media is the reading of the miranda rights in arrest situations. Although the scene is often portrayed on TV, it can be uncertain or untrue in real life. Common questions some may have in regards to miranda rights is, does law enforcement have to read you your miranda rights? What is admissible in court?

    These are some important questions to know the answer to. First, it is important to know the difference between custody and interrogation.

    • Custody is when law enforcement has you and is keeping you, possibly with the intent to interrogate.
    • Interrogation is when officers asked suspects or persons of interests pointed questions in regards to a case.

    Now that you know the difference between custody and interrogation, here is how miranda rights matter in interrogation and in cases.

    There’s sometimes a question about whether the police have interrogated someone who provided incriminating information. If the suspect freely volunteered the statements and there was no interrogation, then the government is typically free to use those statements at trial. (See Does Miranda apply to spontaneous statements?) But if the officers interrogated the suspect—even without asking pointed questions—and there’s been no warning, then the prosecution can’t use the statements. It all comes down to the meaning of “interrogation.”

    To determine whether something other than express questioning constitutes interrogation, a court must evaluate the officers’ words and actions, other than those that are part of the normal arrest or custody process. The judge considers whether the police should have known that anything they did or said was reasonably likely to draw out an incriminating response. (Some courts say express questioning doesn’t constitute incrimination unless it has the tendency to evoke a damaging statement, but others say all express questioning equals interrogation.)

    Ultimately, officers can speak to un-Mirandized  suspects whom they have in custody as long as what they say isn’t likely to elicit an incriminating response.

    Read more

    • delicious
    • digg
    • reddit

Comments are closed.

Jake Brower Criminal Defense Attorney, DUI Lawyer, Felony Arrests, 3-Strike Cases, Criminal Law, Drunk Driving Lawyer, Los Angeles, Orange, Anaheim, Corona del Mar, Costa Mesa, Irvine, Huntington Beach, Long Beach, Mission Viejo, Aliso Viejo, Lake Forest, Rancho Santa Margarita,Santa Ana, Newport Beach, Newport Coast, Laguna Beach, Laguna Niguel, Riverside, San Diego, Ventura, Beverly Hills, Hollywood,Oceanside, San Clemente, Carlsbad, Dana Point, Seal Beach, Long Beach, 1043 Civic Center Drive West, #200, Santa Ana CA 92703