FREE e-Newsletter
Important News - Hot Topics
Get them Now!

Departments : Point of Law

Premature Miranda Warnings

Mirandizing too soon can be a mistake.

December 14, 2009  |  by Devallis Rutledge - Also by this author

Miranda Warnings Preclude Impeachment with Silence

Officers with this belief should know people who have an innocent explanation for their actions are likely to give it immediately, rather than waiting several months or years to give it for the first time at their criminal trial. This reasoning explains the general rule that a defendant's story first told at trial can be impeached by pointing out that he never told the story to arresting officers, when an innocent person would logically have done so. However, whether the prosecutor will be permitted to use this impeachment technique will depend on whether arresting officers did-or did not-jump the gun with Miranda warnings, as illustrated by two U.S. Supreme Court rulings.

Doyle v. Ohio. Jefferson Doyle and another man were involved in a controlled drug transaction with a police informant. Upon Doyle's arrest, a narcotics officer immediately Mirandized him and Doyle made no statements. At trial, Doyle testified to facts that, if believed by a jury, would have constituted a defense based on his having been framed by the informant. The prosecutor impeached Doyle by showing that he did not tell this exculpatory story to the officers, suggesting that this story was contrived for trial. Doyle was convicted and appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which reversed. The court said this:

"Assurance that silence will carry no penalty is implicit to any person who receives the warnings. It would be fundamentally unfair to allow the arrested person's silence to be used to impeach [if silence was induced by the warnings]. We hold that the use for impeachment purposes of defendant's silence, at the time of arrest and after receiving Miranda warnings, violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment." (Doyle v. Ohio)

Fletcher v. Weir. Eric Weir was arrested for stabbing another man to death during a fight. He was not immediately Mirandized, and he offered no justification for his actions to arresting officers. At trial, Weir testified that he was acting in self-defense and that he stabbed the victim accidentally. He was impeached with the fact that he did not mention this defense to police at the time of his arrest. His conviction was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, which said the following:

"The significant difference between the present case and Doyle is that the record does not indicate that defendant received any Miranda warnings during the period in which he remained silent immediately after his arrest. In the absence of Miranda warnings, we do not believe that it violates due process to permit cross-examination as to postarrest silence when a defendant chooses to take the stand." (Fletcher v. Weir)

In view of these two rulings, it is obvious that premature Miranda warnings at the time of arrest can deprive the prosecution of the ability to expose a defendant's untruthful testimony at trial, while waiting to Mirandize until custodial interrogation is imminent can provide the potential for such impeachment.

The Right Time to Mirandize

To ensure admissibility of statements, give Miranda warnings just before commencement of apparent custodial police interrogation-not sooner. Leave Hollywood tactics to the actors.

Devallis Rutledge is a former police officer and veteran prosecutor who currently serves as Special Counsel to the Los Angeles County District Attorney. He is the author of 12 books, including "Investigative Constitutional Law."

«   Page 2 of 2   »

Tags: Point of Law, Miranda Law, U.S. Supreme Court Cases, Interrogation Techniques


Be the first to comment on this story





POLICE Magazine does not tolerate comments that include profanity, personal attacks or antisocial behavior (such as "spamming" or "trolling"). This and other inappropriate content or material will be removed. We reserve the right to block any user who violates this, including removing all content posted by that user.

Other Recent Stories

Police Product Test: Forum Industries Patrol Jacket
Forum Industries is doing some wonderful things with Gore fabrics and its latest line of...
Oakley's PRIZM Shooting Lenses
Performance eyewear manufacturer Oakley has long been known for consulting with its...
The Human Element
The one element that has remained unchanged in our ever-growing technological environment,...

Get Your FREE Trial Issue and Win a Gift! Subscribe Today!
Yes! Please rush me my FREE TRIAL ISSUE of POLICE magazine and FREE Officer Survival Guide with tips and tactics to help me safely get out of 10 different situations.

Just fill in the form to the right and click the button to receive your FREE Trial Issue.

If POLICE does not satisfy you, just write "cancel" on the invoice and send it back. You'll pay nothing, and the FREE issue is yours to keep. If you enjoy POLICE, pay only $25 for a full one-year subscription (12 issues in all). Enjoy a savings of over 60% off the cover price!

Offer valid in US only. Outside U.S., click here.
It's easy! Just fill in the form below and click the red button to receive your FREE Trial Issue.
First Name:
Last Name:
Rank:
Agency:
Address:
City:
State:
  
Zip Code:
 
Country:
We respect your privacy. Please let us know if the address provided is your home, as your RANK / AGENCY will not be included on the mailing label.
E-mail Address:

Police Magazine