I was just thinking, since you are drunk you probably are not able to comprihend what the cop is saying so does the Meranda Rights hold up? Just curious
2007-12-25 06:54:25 · 17 answers · asked by I got 2 points for this answer 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
You have the right to remain silent.
But you don't have the ability.
2007-12-25 06:59:08 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋
Miranda is something that I think most people do not correctly understand. I blame this on people getting their knowledge of law from TV legal dramas and cop shows.
In the real world, you do not need to be given your Maranda Warnings when you are arrested. Dispite what you see on Law and Order the police do not start rambling off Maranda when they put the cuffs on you.
The only time Miranda needs to be given is when a person is being questioned while in police custody about matters that the police should "reasonably" expect to illict guilty replies.
If you are arrested on the street by a uniform cop chances are you will not hear Miranada because they don't need to question you.
As far as Miranda and being drunk are concerned , yes you are correct. Being intoxicated means that legally you cannot understand your rights. Anything gained through questioning, even with Miranada given, to a drunk person can potentially be suppressed in court. However anything that you blurt out in your drunken state is fair game, so long as the police didn't intentionally try to illict the information. So being drunk isn't a coverall to self incrimination.
2007-12-25 07:36:27 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Yes, any statements that you made will still count in a court of law as long as the officer read the miranda rights before asking you any questions. However, even if they wouldnt stick up in court, the officer has plenty of other evidence to pursue the case. He will have your breathalyzer and the resutls of your roadside tests. He will also have a log of the violations that you committed that made him stop you in the first place, he doesnt need a confession from you to pursure tha case.
2007-12-25 09:00:09 · answer #3 · answered by Test 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I love this one. You do not have to be read your rights before you are arrested. You only have to be advised your rights prior to in custody questioning.
If you were arrested for being drunk (Public Intoxication) and chose to argue the fact that you were intoxicated and did not understand your rights, then you just proved the officers case by admiting to being drunk. They did not arrest you based on statements you made after you were advised your rights. The most that could happen is that you get any statements thrown out, however you will have to admitt to the crime and therefore still be found guilty in order to do that.
2007-12-25 10:33:06 · answer #4 · answered by thanson73 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
It's Miranda and chances are yes, they would, if you were soo drunk that you couldn't comprehend then more than likely, the cop would question you anyways, so Miranda would not be applicable.
2007-12-25 22:38:20 · answer #5 · answered by joseph b 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Mirranda Rights are only important if you are IN CUSTODY, or BEING LAWFULLY DETAINED by the Police, and they are asking you questions about the crime for which you are being detained. If you are able to give appropriate responses to the questions you are asked during the Mirranda admonition, then you are usually considered to have reasonable understood your rights.
The types of questions that the Police ask you during a DUI stop are something that you agreed to as a condition of being granted your driver's license.
2007-12-25 07:24:25 · answer #6 · answered by Steve B 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
It isn't our problem or fault that you or anyone arrested drank or used drugs so why should your confession not count? YOU (or whoever is arrested) voluntarily used the drugs or alcohol so why should the communiuty suffer for that judgement error on your/their part?
So to sum it up, yes, it counts if the MIRANDA advisement is read to a drunk person.
2007-12-25 07:03:25 · answer #7 · answered by Rottluver 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
YOUR RIGHTS ARE NOT VIOLATED.
MIRANDA STATES:
"PRIOR TO ANY QUESTIONING, THE PERSON MUST BE WARNED:
1) THAT HE HAS A RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT
2) THAT ANY STATEMENT HE DOES MAKE MAY BE USED AS EVIDENCE AGAINST HIM
3) THAT HE HAS A RIGHT TO THE PRESENCE OF AN ATTORNEY, EITHER RETAINED OR APPOINTED."
THIS ALL PERTAINS TO CUSTODIAL INTERROGATIONS.
YOU NEED NOT BE INTERROGATED BY AN OFFICER TO DETERMINE IF YOU ARE UNDER THE INFLUENCE TO A POINT THAT YOU ARE NOT FUNCTIONAL.
THE COURT THEN FURTHER STRESSED UNDER MIRANDA:
"AGAIN, WE STRESS THAT THE MODERN PRACTICE OF IN -CUSTODY INTERROGATION IS PSYCHOLOGICAL RATHER THEN PHYSICALLY ORIENTED."
SO HOW WOULD MIRANDA BE APPLIED?
2007-12-25 07:35:24 · answer #8 · answered by ahsoasho2u2 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Cops do not need statements from you for being drunk in public. Its black and white there. You are, or are not drunk in public.
Miranda is not required.
2007-12-25 08:32:29 · answer #9 · answered by California Street Cop 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Even if the officer didn't read you your rights, you can still be charged, but if the officer asks questions without reading the miranda, he/she would lose the case
2007-12-25 20:54:31 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Since you can't really prove that you couldn't understand the miranda warnings, anyone could use that to get statements thrown out.
'I was too drunk to understand'
'I was too distraught to understand'
'I was too dumb to understand'
2007-12-25 07:00:37 · answer #11 · answered by lmn78744 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋