• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Miranda Rights and untruthful statments

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Slimthehippe

Junior Member
Wisconsin

My girlfriend and I were stopped for speeding in St. Croix county WI. And went through to motions of the reg. license and registration thing, no big deal. Then he asked me to step out I was detained and searched and my dugout was found on my person. They detained her and searched the car and found a pipe and a bag of marijuana under the seat. They asked if it was mine I said nothing she then (separately) said it was hers.

Problems with court documents.
Paperwork states that I told the Trooper that “whatever I find doesn’t belong to him me”.
That was never said I was still hoping that they wouldn’t find anything in the car.
Paperwork states that I told the Trooper that “the small black bag with marijuana inside belonged to my gf”.
There was no small black bag, I am not disputing the fact that there was marijuana in the car but there are statements by a Trooper that simply didn’t happen.
My girlfriend and I were not read our Miranda Rights until after we had been fingerprinted. It really felt like it was an afterthought.
Questions:
Why was I not charged with position of THC when my dug-out had 1.1g and my gf got charged with 6.5g?>>>Maybe because of Priors???
Was anything my gf or I said during the search of the car inadmissible due to the fact that we had not been Mirandized yet?
Is there any way to see the dash cam footage before the Pre-trial hearing?
In the report it states that we had been “detained” for the search of the car, does Miranda come into play if we were only “detained”? BUT>>>> If the court is using what my gf and I allegedly had said as evidence in the report then we should have been read our rights before obtaining these statements?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?
 


swalsh411

Senior Member
You have some misunderstandings about how Miranda works. Anything you said to the officers before being arrested doesn't require Miranda protection. You basically volunteered that information. You also appear to have consented to a search. You were not yet under arrest and you didn't have to answer any questions other than provide license/registration. You appear to have both been in possession and were charged accordingly.

Miranda only applies to custodial situations (aka after arrest) and then only if the police wish to use statements given after that point as evidence.

Temporary detention (for example while you car is searched) does not require Miranda nor an arrest.

You should have just STFU.

I hope you have a lawyer.
 

Mass_Shyster

Senior Member
The detention may or may not have been custodial. There are a lot of factors the court looks at.

The issue is whether, under the totality of the circumstances, a reasonable person in the suspect's position would have considered himself to be in custody given the degree of restraint. State v. Gruen, 218 Wis.2d 581, 589-90, 582 N.W.2d 728 at 594 (Ct.App.1998). The totality of the circumstances includes such relevant factors as the defendant's freedom to leave the scene; the purpose, place and length of the interrogation; and the degree of restraint involved. Id. In considering the degree of restraint involved, relevant factors include whether the defendant was handcuffed, whether a gun was drawn on him, whether a frisk was performed, the manner in which he was restrained, whether he was moved to another location, whether questioning took place in a police car, and the number of officers involved. Id. at 594-96, 582 N.W.2d 728. State v. Pierson L 4646903, 3 -4 (Wis.App.,2008)

You certainly need a lawyer if you want to argue that the search or questioning was illegal.
 
Last edited:

swalsh411

Senior Member
It doesn't really matter in this case. Miranda would only come into play if they were trying to use statements against him. If he consented to a search (or they had probable cause to search) and they found pot it doesn't matter whether or not he made any statements in regards to having pot. They have the physical evidence.
 

BOR

Senior Member
You have some misunderstandings about how Miranda works. Anything you said to the officers before being arrested doesn't require Miranda protection.

Miranda only applies to custodial situations (aka after arrest) and then only if the police wish to use statements given after that point as evidence.

Temporary detention (for example while you car is searched) does not require Miranda nor an arrest.
This is not entirely true. Although the US SC has ruled a routine traffic stop is NOT custodial in nature for purposes of Miranda, no state laws, nor the federal constitution, ever mandate an arrest to trigger Miranda. When a "Seizure" has taken place, and stopping a motor vehicle is a seizure, one is also in "Custody". Whether Miranda applies is state specific, as the US SC case I mention is a basic non crossover of original purpose detention to an investigative detention.
 

swalsh411

Senior Member
This is not entirely true. Although the US SC has ruled a routine traffic stop is NOT custodial in nature for purposes of Miranda, no state laws, nor the federal constitution, ever mandate an arrest to trigger Miranda. When a "Seizure" has taken place, and stopping a motor vehicle is a seizure, one is also in "Custody". Whether Miranda applies is state specific, as the US SC case I mention is a basic non crossover of original purpose detention to an investigative detention.
Allright. But that's not my point. If the OP consented to a search, or they had probable cause, and found something illegal, then it wouldn't matter if he was read his rights or not because the police don't need to use his statements against him.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top