When Is Miranda Required?

Anthony Bandiero

Attorney - Senior Legal Instructor

Share:

Today’s question is: when is Miranda required during a detention?

First of all, this is a little bit of a pet peeve of mine. When I go around the country, many officers tell me that Miranda is required when the person is not free to leave. They were taught this. Unfortunately it’s bad training, and oftentimes it’s the lawyers who are training them to say it.

That is not the legal standard.

Being not free to leave is a detention. And we know that during detentions, Miranda is not required.

For example, during a DUI investigation. How many times have you read Miranda to a DUI suspect during field sobriety tests? Almost never. Because it’s a detention and you’re in the investigative phase.

Yet the person is not free to leave. Certainly if the person turned around and started walking away you would detain them, probably arrest them for obstruction, and press the DUI as well. My point is, they are not free to leave. But Miranda is not required.

The three things that actually trigger Miranda

Instead, officers need to articulate that Miranda is required when there are three components.

One. Arrest-like custody. Not “not free to leave.” Arrest-like custody.

Two. Imminent interrogation. If you arrest somebody and put them in the back of the police car, and you’re going to question them at the station, Miranda is not required at that point, because you’re not interrogating him. You’re not asking him questions that are reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response. You can wait for Miranda until you get to the station, or you can read it on scene. It’s not going to expire that soon.

Three. A known officer. This makes sense. If you have a suspect in jail pre-arraignment, that’s before the Sixth Amendment kicks in. You have somebody in a holding cell during the 48-hour hold, or whatever your state does, and you insert an undercover agent into that cell, and that person confesses. That is valid. It can be used against them.

So three things: arrest-like custody, imminent interrogation, and a known officer.

When is it “arrest-like custody”?

Let’s go back to arrest-like custody, because there are times Miranda will be required even though you have not intentionally made a formal arrest.

Let’s say you put handcuffs on somebody and put them in the back of a police car. More times than not, that is going to be arrest-like custody. A reasonable person in those circumstances would believe they were formally arrested. So that’s when Miranda is required.

Pointing a gun at somebody and telling them to get down felony prone? It’s possible the courts are going to look at that as just a detention and not arrest-like custody. But you better have facts that back that up.

For example, if the suspect is believed to have committed an armed robbery, then the force, the pointing of the gun, the felony prone, matched the circumstances. So the courts may say look, that’s a detention, not an arrest.

But you point a gun and felony prone somebody for stealing a candy bar? That is certainly going to be arrest-like custody. And we may have an excessive force claim as well.

Why the wrong standard hurts you in court

This is what I would like you to articulate, especially if you’re asked in court.

As I demonstrate in one of my classes, if an officer tells the court that Miranda is required when the person is not free to leave, that can cause a little embarrassing conversation between the defense attorney and the officer. Because that is not the standard.

And if the officer did not have probable cause at that particular point, then the officer is basically articulating that he or she committed an unlawful arrest. I’m not going to go down that road here, but I can explain it if you want.

My point is this. Articulate that it’s arrest-like custody. Would a reasonable person in those shoes believe they had been arrested?

If the answer is yes, Miranda is required. Even though you may not have intentionally wanted to arrest them yet. That’s just the way it works.

I hope this helps, and I hope it moves the ball forward. Until next time, stay safe.

Related from Blue to Gold

This article is an edited transcript of Roadside Chat Ep. #35. It is legal training, not legal advice. Check your state law and your agency policy, because both can be more restrictive than the Fourth Amendment.

Related Training

Interview and Interrogation Case Law is a comprehensive course that equips officers with the legal knowledge and strategies needed to conduct effective and defensible interviews. This training clarifies the application of the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, detailing when rights attach, how to properly obtain and document waivers, and the rules for re-initiating questioning. Officers will explore Miranda history, custody and interrogation definitions, emergency exceptions, juvenile considerations, and how to correct Miranda mistakes. With a focus on real-world case law and practical guidance, this course reduces liability and strengthens confessions. Includes a completion certificate and Search & Seizure Survival Guide.

More Posts

Are Orders to Detain and Transport a Suspect for an Interview Lawful?

An officer in Missouri asked about a common practice in Kansas City, where prosecutors issue a stop order or person of interest order and the person is then handcuffed and transported to the station for a formal interview. Anthony walks through why that is fine if the order rests on probable cause, and why it is a serious problem if it does not.

Read More »

Can You Arrest a Robbery Suspect Who Tells You to Leave His Curtilage?

Officers had probable cause for a strong armed robbery, no arrest warrant, and a suspect on his own front porch telling them at least five times to leave. Anthony walks through the Fourth Amendment rules of engagement for curtilage, why a felony by itself is not exigency, and why the hardest skill in police work is recognizing when you have been legally beat.

Read More »

Send Us A Message

0
    0
    Your Cart