Tag: Miranda Law: Page 5

Patrol

Unmixing Mixed-Up Concepts

How many times have you heard the expression "PC for the stop"? How about the application of Miranda once the suspect is "not free to leave?" These are common examples of improper mixing that can undercut the case against a guilty perpetrator.

December 31, 2007

Patrol

Setting Up Talks

One of the most troublesome legal issues in law enforcement is the question of when an officer may resume discussions with a suspect after some kind of Miranda "history" has occurred. The answer is, "It all depends."

October 31, 2007

Patrol

Cold Case Interrogations

In many instances, the suspect in a cold case turns out to be someone who is serving time for another crime. What are the considerations for conducting custodial interrogation of such a prisoner, insofar as Miranda and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel are concerned?

February 28, 2007

Patrol

Miranda Wording

When custodial interrogation is imminent and it's time to give the suspect a Miranda warning, what exactly do you have to say? The answer is, nothing exactly. The U.S. Supreme Court, which created the necessity of a warning of rights and a waiver as prerequisites to the prosecutorial use of a statement obtained through custodial interrogation, has never held that any precise wording is required.

September 30, 2006

Patrol

Right to Counsel

Law enforcement officers are quite familiar with the court-created "right" to counsel established by the Miranda opinion, to protect the Fifth Amendment trial privilege against compelled self-incrimination. But it applies only during police custodial interrogation.

January 31, 2006

Patrol

Davis Rules

In a fairly common scenario, you obtain a valid Miranda waiver from a suspect in custody and begin interrogation. Part-way through your questioning, the suspect begins to feel uneasy about going forward and says something about remaining silent or talking to a lawyer.

December 31, 2005

Patrol

Resumption of Questioning

Once a custodial suspect has been given Miranda warnings, there are three basic options he can choose to exercise: (1) waive his rights and agree to talk, (2) invoke his right to remain silent, or (3) invoke his right to counsel. The suspect’s response determines whether, and under what circumstances, he can later be re-approached by law enforcement officers to obtain an admissible statement.

June 30, 2005

Patrol

Does Miranda Bear Poisonous Fruit?

More than a handful of judges, lawyers, and police officers mistakenly thought of Miranda as some sort of judicial rule about how police officers are required to conduct interrogations.

August 31, 2004

Special Units

Undercover Interrogation

The admissibility rule of Miranda v. Arizona generally dictates that you give the standard warning and get a voluntary waiver before interrogating a suspect in custody. But not always.

July 31, 2004

Special Units

After the Echo

It’s her left hand, and there’s a gun in it. I quarter her head with my reticle. Then I see her gun hand come up fully in line with the entry team members. She straightens her arm as if taking aim, and I squeeze the trigger.

February 29, 2004

Patrol

Demystifying Miranda

One of the most blatant mistakes entertainers insist on perpetuating is the notion that Miranda warnings have to be given immediately upon the suspect being hooked up.

June 30, 2003

Patrol

High Court: Fleeing, Other Factors Justify Detention

Ratcheting up the authority of police to stop and question fleeing individuals, the U.S. Supreme Court in mid-January, ruled that officers can legally detain someone who runs upon merely seeing the police if other factors are present and can be articulated by officers.

January 31, 2000