Re: no Miranda rights read

More | Report Post

On 4/23/03, sharwinston wrote:
> Miranda warnings apply ONLY to "custodial interrogations".
>
> Police are required to give an arrestee "Miranda" warnings
> where there is a custodial interrogation AND the
interrogation
> is likely to elicit an incriminating response. Routine
> booking questions are allowed (i.e. name, address, date of
> birth, soc sec #, etc).
>
> You were arrested (that's custody). If you were never
> interrogated, a reading of Miranda warnings was NOT
required.
>
> fyi: Many people are arrested & never interrogated. However,
> police officers routinely do Mirandize (as seen on TV)
> arrestees to protect themselves from possible screw ups
(when
> one officer does try to interrogate later on & is not aware
> that the arrestee was not Mirandized).
>
> You can research this more yourself by searching "Miranda
> warnings" using any search engine - you will get thousands
of
> hits.
>
> On 4/23/03, Craig wrote:
>> ...I pulled over and arreset for driving without a valid
>> liecence and posscession of drug pharanela. The reason for
>> being pulled over was "suspious driving" and I was not read
>> my rights.
Being in CUSTODY does not necessarirly mean under arrest.If
you are handcuffed and in back of a police car, but have not
been told you are under arrest,you are in custody of the
police .The law does not say they have to MIRANDARIZE you,but
if they DO NOT anything you say after being asked can not be
used against you,but give nothing voluntarily except
exculpatory statements,etc.A person has been SEIZED(in
custody) under the U.S. 4th AM. if they are restrained of
thier liberty to the point they feel they are not FREE to walk
away as in Florida v. Royer.

Re: no Miranda rights read, 3/07/05, by Kathy.

Due Process Chatboard

LATEST POSTS | BY TOPICS | SUBMIT A POST