UPM 221.05 violation, Miranda Rights

[birdman95]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? NY

A friend and i were both recently charged with unlawful possession of marijuana. We were parked in her car on a dirt road being developed when the cop pulled up. My friend admitted immediately we were smoking weed (it was blatantly obvious) and i admitted i had some as well. We are both 18 and it is our first offense. The only other thing on my record is a speeding ticket which i have plead not guilty to and am awaiting a court date. We were both handcuffed and brought down to the police station, where we were further questioned. The officer never informed either of us of our Miranda Rights. Although he clearly arrested us, he never stated we were under arrest, only asked us "if we had ever been arrested before".

Is this a violation of our Miranda rights? The only reason i could think of it being ok is because it is just a violation, but i dont know much about this and could use some clarification.

I would also like to know (due to my own curiosity) is if it was necessary for him to arrest us? Another friend of mine got a UPM, during a traffic stop while at college (in NY, not campus police), and was given a ticket on site and that was the end of it. Does it vary from town to town to town?

I would like to try and get an ACD. Will it be easy to just request one if i cooperate with the courts?

 

[justalayman]

whether it is or isn't is very fact specific but be aware that the only benefit of not having been read your rights when they are required is your statements after that time can be excluded from the evidence against you. Since you volunteered the information you were in possession of marijuana without being arrested, your confession pretty much cooks your goose,

 

[FlyingRon]

To be specific, Miranda is only required before they question you while you are in custody (i.e., after you are arrested). The cops are allowed to ask questions without Miranda when you're not in custody.

Whether they arrest you or not is purely at the officer's discretion/department policy. Often it matters whether they think you've given them proper identification and your probability to show up on the charges.

ACD would likely be a good outcome for you.

 

[tranquility]

C'mon guys, the OP was clearly under arrest and his Miranda rights were violated. However, since it is unlikely any additional evidence was gathered, there really isn't a remedy.

We were both handcuffed and brought down to the police station, where we were further questioned.

That there would be called a custodial interrogation. Period.

Handcuffed, put in the back of the police car and driven to the police station where they were questioned is going to be an arrest. What other possible indicator would you be looking for? What reasonable person could possibly believe he was not arrested under those circumstances. Any one of the three could be considered an arrest; all three together?

 

[Zigner]

C'mon guys, the OP was clearly under arrest and his Miranda rights were violated. However, since it is unlikely any additional evidence was gathered, there really isn't a remedy.

That there would be called a custodial interrogation. Period.

Handcuffed, put in the back of the police car and driven to the police station where they were questioned is going to be an arrest. What other possible indicator would you be looking for? What reasonable person could possibly believe he was not arrested under those circumstances. Any one of the three could be considered an arrest; all three together?

The admission was volunteered prior to the arrest. If the "questioning" at the station is thrown out, they've still got that.

Furthermore, with the clouds of smoke billowing from the car, I doubt an admission was needed in the first place

 

[tranquility]

The admission was volunteered prior to the arrest. If the "questioning" at the station is thrown out, they've still got that.

Furthermore, with the clouds of smoke billowing from the car, I doubt an admission was needed in the first place

I agree. It was only the questioning at the station (maybe in the police car on the way) that is a clear violation. As I said, by that time, it was unlikely any additional evidence was gathered.

 

[Zigner]

I agree. It was only the questioning at the station (maybe in the police car on the way) that is a clear violation.

That would really depend on what the questions were

 

[CJane]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?
I would also like to know (due to my own curiosity) is if it was necessary for him to arrest us? Another friend of mine got a UPM, during a traffic stop while at college (in NY, not campus police), and was given a ticket on site and that was the end of it.

Was your friend ACTUALLY SMOKING the weed when they were pulled over? Do you think that the officer - KNOWING that both you and your friend were under the influence of marijuana - should have just LET YOU DRIVE AWAY?

 

[tranquility]

That would really depend on what the questions were

Yes. Questions of an identifying nature as normal booking procedure would not only not be used against the person, but also would not be part of an interrogation.

 

[Zigner]

Yes. Questions of an identifying nature as normal booking procedure would not only not be used against the person, but also would not be part of an interrogation.

This is the first I've heard of an interrogation...

 

[tranquility]

This is the first I've heard of an interrogation...

I believe asking if they were arrested before might be considered a question or comment designed to elicit an incriminating response.

 

[HighwayMan]

Not to be argumentative, but what kind of incriminating response are you referring to?

I was going to say that the defendant's idea of "questioning" could be very different than ours.

 

[tranquility]

Not to be argumentative, but what kind of incriminating response are you referring to?

I was going to say that the defendant's idea of "questioning" could be very different than ours.

If they were asking questions other than in the booking process, were they just bored that day?

 

[Zigner]

If they were asking questions other than in the booking process, were they just bored that day?

Maybe...since they really don't have any bearing on the case and the responses will likely never be heard by anyone else anyway.


Remember...billowing smoke and the stench of good ol' Mary J go a long way to proving possession

 

[tranquility]

Maybe...since they really don't have any bearing on the case and the responses will likely never be heard by anyone else anyway.


Remember...billowing smoke and the stench of good ol' Mary J go a long way to proving possession

But, it does not prove who bought it, if they sold it, where they got it from, if they gave it to anyone else, if they smoked before driving there or any of a number of things. The OP felt he was questioned when he went to the station. Unless they were booking questions, it was almost assuredly an interrogation. I doubt the OP would have felt he was being questioned if he was simply being asked his opinion of Justin Bieber.

It was more likely a technique of questioning without Miranda and, if some confession, then Mirandize and get an admissible confession. Missouri v. Seibert did not really change the two-step of police interrogation techniques. If the OP was next door, in New Jersey, he would have been protected. NY? I'll have to rely on HighwayMan to see if their state courts have made the technique illegal.