Understanding Your Rights During Police Interrogations – A Guide by Jackson Law

It’s a common misconception that an arrest is void if the police fail to provide a Miranda warning. While not being “read your rights” doesn’t guarantee freedom from consequences, it does have significant implications for how evidence is used in court. Here’s what you need to know.

The Miranda Warnings Clarified

Inscribed into law by the landmark Supreme Court case Miranda v. Arizona, the rights afforded to a suspect, often dramatized in TV crime dramas, are as follows:

• You have the right to remain silent.
• Anything you say can be used against you in a court of law.
• You have the right to consult with an attorney and have the attorney present during any questioning.
• Should you be unable to afford an attorney, one will be provided to you if you wish.
• You may decide to discontinue the interview with the police at any point. (This is frequently left out in fictional portrayals.)

When Must Police Officers Provide a Miranda Warning?

The decisive factor for a Miranda warning requirement is whether an individual is in custody—meaning their freedom of action is significantly restricted. Regardless of the location or situation, if the intention is to use a suspect’s statements in court, a Miranda warning is obligatory.

However, if the individual is not detained or in police custody, no warning is necessary, and their statements can be admissible in court should they later face charges. This is particularly relevant in cases where someone reveals a crime to the police spontaneously or during a non-custodial street stop.

Questioning Before Arrest

A surprising fact for many is that police can legally question individuals and use their responses in court without a Miranda warning if the person is not under arrest.

How Should You Respond to Pre-Arrest Questioning?

You are not required to answer police questions prior to arrest. The Fifth Amendment protects your right to remain silent, a right that persists unless officers have a “probable cause” for arrest or a “reasonable suspicion” to perform a “stop and frisk.” At Jackson Law, we advise to exercise this right and seek legal counsel before engaging in dialogue with law enforcement.

There are exceptions, such as a stop for suspected traffic violations where providing identification is necessary, or if suspected of loitering as defined and enforced by various state laws.

The Protocol for “Stop and Frisk” Encounters

During a “stop and frisk,” an officer may conduct a quick pat-down search for weapons based on “reasonable suspicion” of criminal activity. A mere act like running from police can trigger such an action.

Should this frisk result in the discovery of illegal items, it can lead to a more thorough search or an arrest.

Post-Arrest Interrogations

After an arrest, Miranda rights become crucial. Remaining silent is often the best defense, pending consultation with an attorney, as any unintentional self-incriminating evidence can be harmful to a case.

Implications of Not Receiving a Miranda Warning

In situations where a Miranda warning is not provided ahead of custodial interrogation, the suspect’s statements cannot be used against them at trial. This extends to any subsequent evidence obtained as a direct result of such interrogation, known as the “fruit of the poisonous tree.”

When Law Enforcement Exceeds Boundaries

It’s critical that any admissions made to police are voluntary. Any evidence acquired through coercion or force, whether physical or psychological, is inadmissible in court. This also includes any evidence found as a result of such coercion.

If you find yourself facing questioning by the police, know that your rights are here to protect you. For legal advice and representation, you can trust the team at Jackson Law. Contact us at 650-587-8556 for assistance with understanding your rights and navigating any legal issues related to police questioning.