close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Miranda

Discussion in 'Cop Talk' started by i8547, Mar 20, 2010.

  1. i8547

    i8547 Without Equal

    Messages:
    938
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2003
    Location:
    CONUS - mostly
    I placed myself in an interesting Miranda predicament recently that got me thinking after I saw what transpired from it and figured I'd pose a question for debate/discussion:

    Two agencies are involved with a single suspect. Agency Alpha encountered the subject first on a crime they had interest in and requested Agency Bravo to come out to determine who has more interest in the suspect based on a the possibility of another crime having been committed that Agency Bravo would be more fit to handle. Personnel from Agency Bravo arrives, gets a brief overview of how the suspect was encountered and why they were called.

    Agency Bravo personnel begin to question the suspect, as personnel from Agency Alpha witness it from a "reasonable" distance. The line of questioning from Agency Bravo personnel turns toward the crime (of interest to them) in question, thus they Mirandize the suspect. The suspect invokes. Agency Bravo decides they want nothing to do with the suspect and informs Agency Alpha of this.

    Agency Alpha is kosher with this and then carts the suspect off on the original crime they encountered him on.

    So here are the questions for debate/discussion:
    1) Does Agency Alpha treat the subject as having invoked his right to counsel as it pertains to future questioning in relation to the crime they are focusing on?
    2) Does Agency Alpha Mirandize again?
    3) Should Agency Bravo say "Hey, I Mirandized him and he invoked..."
    4) Do any statements made by the suspect to Agency Alpha get thrown out?

    Talk about it for a bit and then I'll post back with the actual outcome...
     
  2. 9L82

    9L82 Caffeine Addled

    Messages:
    1,245
    Likes Received:
    8
    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    on my couch & in my underwear
    Agency A is questioning about a different cime, they are required to read Miranda again, but his invocation only aplies to the crime Agency B questioned him about. The courts here have been clear that if there is a significant break in questioning o the introduction of a new interrogator, you should re-read Miranda.

    In my opinion, not only is another interrogator questioning him, they are from an entirely different agency asking about a totally unrelated incident.
     

  3. lawman800

    lawman800 Juris Glocktor

    Messages:
    38,472
    Likes Received:
    118
    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2002
    Location:
    It just keeps getting better, don't it?
    That's what I would say.

    New agency, new interrogator, new Miranda. Suspect may invoke the second time if he wishes. If suspect talks to new interrogator. Then statements may be used against suspect for crimes related to the first agency as well.
     
  4. Hack

    Hack Crazy CO Gold Member

    Messages:
    18,143
    Likes Received:
    24
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    Location:
    Kansas, near the bison.
    Yes, that is how things go with us, IIRC, between two federal agencies if one has considered an inmate being involved in a crime of interest, then that agency may be the one who Mirandizes him.

    I don't deal with it as much, because a lot of what I deal with is considered administrative stuff, concerning inmates. However, those inmates if they were to pull some of that same stuff on the outside would basically be locked up and bound over for charges.
     
  5. MarcDW

    MarcDW MDW Guns Millennium Member

    Messages:
    3,737
    Likes Received:
    12
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 1999
    Location:
    Maine USA
    Technically when agency B left the custody over him ended.
    A then took him into custody. Every time you take someone into custody and question him/her, you have to Miranda.
    For example, I went to court to summons one of my old suspects.
    He was in the orange and bussed in by the SO to the court house for arraignment.
    Since I wanted to question him I had to read him Miranda.
    My luck, there were two public defenders (not his pd's) right behind him since there was no other location.
    Boy went that one well! :upeyes:
    He was ready to spill everything and those pd's almost held their hands in front of his mouth!
     
  6. TBO

    TBO Why so serious? CLM

    Messages:
    53,582
    Likes Received:
    37,513
    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    1504 South 7th Street, Minneapolis, MN 55454
  7. Cochese

    Cochese Most mackinest CLM

    Messages:
    12,449
    Likes Received:
    1,664
    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Location:
    Unmarked Rustbox
    Tell CBP they can have 'em after your done, next time! :supergrin:
     
  8. actionshooter10

    actionshooter10 CLM

    Messages:
    1,698
    Likes Received:
    35
    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Location:
    Texas
    +1

    1. No, have to mirandize again.
    2. See #1
    3. Not relevant to Agency Alpha
    4. Any "spontaneous statements" made to agency alpha before being remirandized are admissible.
     
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2010
  9. 9L82

    9L82 Caffeine Addled

    Messages:
    1,245
    Likes Received:
    8
    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    on my couch & in my underwear
    We all forgot the obvious...Don't talk to the police
     
  10. Newcop761

    Newcop761 CLM

    Messages:
    3,813
    Likes Received:
    1,144
    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2001
    Location:
    In Existential Crisis
    I'm going to disagree. I say that when crook invoked to Agency B that it applies to Agency A as well. There is no break in custody. Agency A maintained custody of crook during Agency B's interview / interrogation.
     
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2010
  11. Cav

    Cav

    Messages:
    1,305
    Likes Received:
    15
    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2006
    Location:
    The Great State of Texas
    IMHO...

    If he was not 'detained' where he could not leave, no need for Miranda. Just question him about the crimes.

    If he was detained, one Miranda should be fine, as he was warned about his rights.

    I have read Miranda and then had OGA's question my suspect. But they did waive Miranda.

    If they invoke, then it needs to be re done if you want to question them after another agency.

    IMHO to many people use Miranda on scene vs at the PD where it should be done.

    Build your PC thru questions, then arrest, then Miranda to seal the deal before you ask for guilty statements.
     
  12. jpa

    jpa CLM

    Messages:
    8,030
    Likes Received:
    130
    Joined:
    May 28, 2001
    Location:
    Las Vegas NV
    I agree that he should be re-Mirandized once a new agency takes custody of him. Even while maintaining his custody as another agency interrogates him, eliminate any technical loopholes. I say read him Miranda as many times as you want. I've never heard of a case being thrown out or a statement suppressed because you read Miranda too many times....
     
  13. NYresq

    NYresq

    Messages:
    559
    Likes Received:
    20
    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2010
    Location:
    Long Island, NY
    I would re-mirandize if I was taking over from another agency. The argument could be made that since agency A was within ear-shot and still at the scene, then they never left and were "present" when the suspect was read his rights the first time, and if he invoked, everything after that is tossed out if agency A starts talking to him without a lawyer.
    And anything said before he was mirandized would be admissable as a "spontanious utterance". Once he was read though, I think the door is closed for agency A since they were still present even if they were a few feet away. I would def call the US Attorney before I questioned him if I was Agency A and get his opinion.
     
  14. MarcDW

    MarcDW MDW Guns Millennium Member

    Messages:
    3,737
    Likes Received:
    12
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 1999
    Location:
    Maine USA
    The point is, you don't have to make it a big deal.
    I mirandize people like this:
    Hey Jo, you know that I am a cop right?
    You ******* kidding me, you just arrested me.
    That's right and you know cops like to ask all the time questions, right?
    You do know that you have the right not to answer any of my questions?
    .....

    If you get your card out and you get all stiff, the suspect freezes up faster then a polar bear!
     
  15. Cochese

    Cochese Most mackinest CLM

    Messages:
    12,449
    Likes Received:
    1,664
    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Location:
    Unmarked Rustbox
    That's a regional difference. It wouldn't fly here. We start adlibing and we get called into question on the stand, it can get ugly, at least around these parts.

    JMHO.
     
  16. volsbear

    volsbear IWannaBeSedated Lifetime Member

    Messages:
    11,458
    Likes Received:
    44
    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Location:
    Illinois
    Wouldn't fly here either. Heck, I can't think of an agency that isn't giving suspects the written warning and then having them sign it and having the signature witnessed in some cases. A casual reference to their rights wouldn't cut it.
     
  17. 312

    312

    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2009
    What if your recrding the miranda on audio? Do you still have to use the form? Our verbage on the rights form mentions "interrogation" which, I think scares suspects into clamming up so I just verbally give them miranda sometimes.
     
  18. lawman800

    lawman800 Juris Glocktor

    Messages:
    38,472
    Likes Received:
    118
    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2002
    Location:
    It just keeps getting better, don't it?
    We tape record the Miranda advisement as part of our interview. We tape all of our interviews. We also make them sign the form. As a matter of fact, we just read the form over with the suspect and tape the whole thing. Then we make them initial after each sentence and ask, "do you understand your rights as I read them to you?"

    Man... we coddle them more than we coddle veterans... that is disgusting.
     
  19. Hack

    Hack Crazy CO Gold Member

    Messages:
    18,143
    Likes Received:
    24
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    Location:
    Kansas, near the bison.
    IIRC we have to use the form. But, like I mentioned earlier, most of our stuff is dealt with administratively.
     
  20. txleapd

    txleapd Hook 'Em Up

    Messages:
    4,209
    Likes Received:
    270
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Location:
    TX
    1) Does Agency Alpha treat the subject as having invoked his right to counsel as it pertains to future questioning in relation to the crime they are focusing on?

    Miranda, and invoking right to counsel are offense specific, not agency or officer specific. We work with other agencies all the time (fed, local, state) and tag team suspects on different crimes. Never had a problem in state or federal courts.


    2) Does Agency Alpha Mirandize again?

    For the purposes of the courts, they don't have to (at least not here in Texas). The courts look at the government as being the government, and a cop being a cop, regardless of where you work. There is plenty of 6th Amendment case law out there to support this. SCOTUS has ruled more than once on a person invoking his right to counsel with one agency being upheld when a different agency tries to interrogate about the same offense at a later date (regardless of not knowing about the prior invocation). That's one of the reasons we ended up with the "14 day rule".


    3) Should Agency Bravo say "Hey, I Mirandized him and he invoked..."

    You could, but you don't have to as long as you can document he was Mirandized by a sworn peace officer... You definitely should if you didn't (a) see or hear the suspect get Mirandized, (b) don't know or trust the guy who Mirandized the suspect, (c) think you should just go ahead and Mirandize him anyway...


    4) Do any statements made by the suspect to Agency Alpha get thrown out?

    I'm not sure what you mean by this.... Any res gestae statements, or anything the suspect says between the time he is Mirandized and invokes council is admissible as long as it's not coerced (and the reviewing court allows). We've never had a problem.

    Of course it goes without saying that I am where I am... We operate under Texas state law, and the Texas Constitution, the 5th Circuit, and our agency's guidelines. From a straight Constitutional aspect, there shouldn't be any issue. But I don't know how your courts there like to look at things....