Re: Miranda Law Does it Apply to Minors

More | Report Post

On 2/18/08, lisa pierce wrote:
> My son was recently questioned and force to take a brethalizer
> test by the police while he was a t school when one of his
> friends was taken to the hospital after consuming alcohal, the
> school never called me to inform me what was going on or to tell
> me that the police were questioning my son about his involvement
> with the situation. The police told him that if he didn't do
> the breathalizer test he would be arrrested and taken to jail
> and his parents would have to bail him out. I am very angry at
> the school for allowing this to happen and failing to even
> informing that it did happen- he and two other students were
> suspended pending an investigation. I just don't see how this is
> legal

As the person who posted below said, the precedent set by the
Miranda decision is only applicable to custodial interrogation and
a violation of Miranda only means that the evidence gained by the
interrogation may not be used in a criminal court. Miranda does
not create a private cause of action (under; 42 USC 1983) if its
requirements are not followed.

There is a doctrine called "special needs" which applies to
searches of students in a public school. Lockers, desks and even
backpacks may be searched at any time for any reason because of
the special need to protect school students. A detailed search of
a student's person is a little less established especially when it
comes to drug/alcohol testing. You would need to see what your
state law allows in terms of school drug/alcohol testing.
Students have a reduced expectation of privacy while on school
property and the scope of an allowable search of a student is
quite broad. For example, California allows searches of students
based on staff suspicion but draws the line at a body cavity
search. I don't know if a breathalyzer is a body cavity search.
It appears that the search of your son (breathalyzer) was based in
part on some suspicion. Your state may allow drug/alcohol
searches of students based on suspicion. In suspicionless
searches, the 4th Amendment will control

As for US Supreme Court decisions on student drug/alcohol testing -
- it is moving toward unrestricted authorization for suspicionless
searches.

In Vernonia Sch. Dist. 47j v. Acton (2002), the Court dealt with
the suspicionless administration of drug tests to student
athletes. In analyzing 4th Amendment concerns involved, the Court
noted that, “there was no clear practice, either approving or
disapproving the type of search at issue, at the time the
constitutional provision was enacted.”

Next in Bd. of Educ. v. Earls (2002), a case involving students
participating in school sponsored activities, the Court found the
governmental “interest in protecting the safety and health of its
students,” outweighed the intrusion of the students’ expectation
of privacy.

Addressing the question of testing all students in a school system
is, of course, the next inevitable issue. There is no question
that if/when the Court agrees to consider this universal testing
issue, the Court will find a governmental concern sufficient to
support the special needs doctrine and that individualized
suspicion will not be necessary. The question of the
constitutionality of drug-testing all students will then stand or
fall on the reasonableness of the scope of the testing.

I did a Crim Pro paper on this topic last year and have excerpted
parts of it in this post. It is probably too long to post the
entire paper and would bore most readers anyway.

> On 3/12/06, Gia wrote:
>> Miranda applies when you have arrest (or its equivalent) plus
>> interrogation. It does not apply just because a person is
>> under arrest.
>>
>> You need to speak to an attorney to determined what actually
>> happened and if Miranda is even an issue.
>>
>> On 3/10/06, Carol wrote:
>>> On 3/09/06, Rudy wrote:
>>>> My Question is does the Miranda Law Apply to Minors, My
>>> son
>>>> 14yrs old. was charged 2 weeks ago for assault against a
>>>> teacher and was questioned in the office of the assitant
>>>> Principal and the police officer about what he did. Now,
>>>> take in mind Me as the parent was not present nor advised
>>>> of the situation until my son came home that he received a
>>>> citation from the officer for an assault and all my son
>>> did
>>>> was shove the teacher back but that is another long story.
>>>> What I like to know is that my son just like anyone else
>>>> has rights especially if he is about to be charged with a
>>>> serious offense, and not to have his parents there or call
>>>> us and tell us about this until after he was given the
>>>> citation, can someone please help me understand this
>>> better.
>>> There are many common misconceptions about Miranda, one
>>> bieng that it is a law that must be followed. Miranda is a
>>> case decided by the US Supreme Court. It is a right, not a
>>> law. What it involves, among other things, is the 5th
>>> amendment right not to incriminate oneself and how a
>>> person's statements can be used agaisnt them. Miranda only
>>> applies if the person is under arrest. Then the requirement
>>> is that the arresting officer tell the person in language
>>> they can understand that they have the right to remain
>>> silent and anything they say will be used against them, also
>>> that they have the right to an attorney, etc. Anyone who
>>> watches cop shows on TV can recite this in their sleep.
>>> Again, THIS ONLY APPLIES IF YOU ARE UNDER ARREST. It does
>>> not apply to citations or questioning. In answer to your
>>> question, yes, juveniles have the same 5th amendment rights
>>> as adults and if a juvenile is arrested the parents are
>>> supposed to be notified. try googling "Miranda rights
>>> +juveniles" for more information. I would suggest hiring a
>>> juvenile defense attorney to represent your son. S/he can
>>> fill you in on all of the other aspects of the case. Any
>>> time someone is charged with a crime it is my recommendation
>>> that they have an attorney. Your freedom is just too
>>> important not to spend the money. Oh, and that's another
>>> part of what the cops have to inform you when you're under
>>> arrest, if you can't afford an attorney the court will give
>>> you one.