Probably not, unfortunately. Many people think that every person in every interaction with the police must be read their rights, as seen on TV. This reading of rights is called a “Miranda” warning, which was set forth in the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case, Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S. Ct. 1602, 16 L. Ed. 2d 694 (1966). A “Miranda” warning is required before a suspect can be interrogated by the police while in custody without a lawyer present in order for a judge to allow any subsequent statements to be admissible at trial. Any statements made prior to being in custody and interrogated could be used in court and are not automatically excluded just because a “Miranda” warning was not made. Even if the cops failed to provide a “Miranda” warning before proceeding with custodial interrogation, this may only exclude statements made during the custodial interrogation. This doesn’t necessarily mean the whole case will be dismissed. There may be other incriminating evidence that could be used against the suspect to prove guilt. However, if any statements made during custodial interrogation that proceeded without a “Miranda” warning are the only evidence the state has against a suspect and a judge excludes such statements, then it’s entirely possible the case may be dismissed.
Blog Categories
- Assault
- Burglary
- Child Pornography Possession / Distribution
- Criminal Vehicular Operation
- Disorderly Conduct
- Domestic Assault
- Drug Crimes
- DWI or DUI
- Expungement
- Felony Offenses
- Forfeiture
- Gross Misdemeanor
- Gun Rights
- Harassment Restraining Order
- Juvenile Crimes
- Malicious Punishment of a Child
- Marijuana in a Motor Vehicle
- Misdemeanor
- Murder / Homocide
- Obstructing Legal Process
- Order For Protection
- Petty Misdemeanor
- Possession of Firearm
- Probation Violation
- Prostitution
- Robbery
- Sex Crimes
- Sexual Assault
- Theft
- Traffic Violations
- Underage Drinking
- Underage Drinking and Driving
- White Collar Crimes