2007-07-29 18:30:30 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Yes. They're called Miranda rights because Miranda got off for the failure of the arresting officer to read them.
2007-07-29 18:40:19 · answer #1 · answered by DOOM 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No.
The Miranda issue really had nothing to do with being arrested. It was about 'custodial interrogation'.
Yes, arrest does count as the "custody" part. But unless you are being questioned (interrogated) Miranda warnings are not required,
Many police say them as part of the arrest procedure, just to cover themselves if you do happen to confess. But they are only required if you are being questioned.
2007-07-29 18:34:09 · answer #2 · answered by coragryph 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I had an interesting personal incident with this very question when i was 17. An ATF officer was staking out a store that would sell alcohol to minors and he happened to see me walk out with some. He pulled me over and confiscated the alcohol and wrote me a summons to appear in court. The judge wound up dismissing the case do to the fact that the officer didn't read me my rights at the time that he pulled me over. The reasoning that the judge gave was that since I was technically detained (not free to leave) my rights had to be read to me.
2007-07-29 19:00:58 · answer #3 · answered by edwoodisgood81 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes....
EDIT:
And he miranda rights are the things they say right "you have the right to ....." if so they HAVE to tell you that. So you know what your rights are.
EDIT:
Well anything can be counted as interogation, them asking you your name what you are doing here etc.
2007-07-29 18:34:33 · answer #4 · answered by fred 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋