The Miranda warning is a form of formal notification regarding personal civil liberties. Police officers may need to provide the Miranda warning to individuals who are in state custody to advise them of their rights.
In some cases, defendants accused of crimes can credibly assert that they experienced a violation of their Miranda rights that could impact the state’s case against them. Their lawyers may then be able to suppress certain evidence.
What circumstances might potentially constitute a violation of a defendant’s Miranda rights?
Not receiving the Miranda warning
Police officers generally need to provide the Miranda warning before they question an individual who is in state custody. They do not need to provide the warning at the time but rather before any questioning occurs. If officers fail to advise defendants of their Miranda rights before questioning them, that could lead to the defendant’s lawyer asking the courts to set aside confessions or other statements made during questioning.
Ignoring an invocation of the Miranda rights
If a person in state custody voices their decision to talk to a lawyer and/or to remain silent, the police officers present generally have to respect the defendant’s choice. If police officers refuse to let an individual contact their lawyer when they ask to do so or if they proceed with questioning someone who has verbally stated that they intend to remain silent for their own protection, that conduct could constitute a Miranda violation.
Reviewing police officer conduct with a legal professional can help people respond effectively to criminal charges. Violations of a defendant’s rights can influence what evidence prosecutors can use during a trial. Miranda violations can potentially play a critical role in a successful criminal defense strategy.
