When watching television shows about police officers or crime, most people have heard about Miranda rights. In the United States, police and crime shows have consistently made up around 20% of all television show broadcasts. In reality, most people are not aware of Miranda rights and the importance of knowing and understanding them as well as recognizing when law enforcement officers have breached them.

There are many people who believe that if their Miranda rights are violated, the charges against them will automatically be acquitted as a result. Nevertheless, this is not true, and the only consequence of a Miranda violation in some cases is that evidence may not be allowed to be used in court. There is, however, some good news here. When the prosecution's evidence is dismissed, the defendant's case will be strengthened and they will have more negotiating room.

The individual should consult a Colorado criminal defense lawyer as soon as possible if they suspect their Miranda rights have been violated. No matter the situation, law enforcement officers should respect every individual's Miranda rights as well as their human rights. As well as ensuring that Miranda rights are respected, it is essential to hold those responsible for the violation of this right accountable.

What Are Miranda Rights?

In the 1940s, the United States Supreme Court acknowledged that police sometimes kept suspects from sleeping, eating, or using the bathroom during prolonged and intermittent interrogations — sometimes even keeping them for days in solitary confinement in a cell aptly enough called “the hole.” Watts v. Indiana, 338 U.S. 49 (1949).

The Commission on Civil Rights in 1961 found much evidence to indicate that police still, even in the 1950s, resorted to physical force to obtain confessions, and that the police brutally beat, kicked, and placed lighted cigarette butts on the back of a potential witness under interrogation for the purpose of securing a statement. People v. Portelli, 15 N. Y. 2d 235 (1965).

And those were just some of the many reasons why, in the 1960s, the United States Supreme Court decided the case of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436 (1966). Thus enacting the requirement of recitation of Miranda rights, which state: “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can be used against you in court. You have the right to talk to a lawyer for advice before we ask you any questions. You have the right to have a lawyer with you during questioning. If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be appointed for you before any questioning if you wish. If you decide to answer questions now without a lawyer present, you have the right to stop answering at any time.”

As a result of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, Miranda rights are protected. During detention by a police officer, the officer may ask a series of questions that are specifically designed to coerce the individual into confessing without first reading them their Miranda rights.

A person is prohibited from doing the following under the Fifth Amendment:

• “Be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.”
• “Undermine the individual's will to resist and compel him to speak where he would not otherwise do so freely”

In order to protect the constitutional privilege against self-incrimination, Miranda rights were established as a result of the deep-rooted coercion involved in interrogations. A person's cognitive understanding of Miranda rights has been recognized by the Supreme Court over time. This is especially true with children, as “the juvenile’s age, experience, education, background, and intelligence,” are taken into account. This also includes the juvenile’s “capacity to understand the warnings given him, the nature of his Fifth Amendment rights, and the consequences of waiving those rights.”

When Are Miranda Rights Required To Be Read?

Contrary to popular belief, police officers do not have to read Miranda rights to individuals immediately upon making contact. It should be noted that Miranda rights do not apply until the individual is requested to undergo an in-custody interrogation.

If a person is detained and arrested at the scene of an alleged crime or is transported to a police station, the police officers are not required to read the individual's Miranda rights immediately if no questions are asked. The individual must be informed of their Miranda rights before being interrogated at a later time.

Individuals can be brought to trial for statements they made without being asked before their Miranda rights were read. Any admission of guilt is included in this category. It is also likely that Miranda rights will not be read to an individual who voluntarily submits to an interrogation by the police.

If a police officer, detective, or any other type of law enforcement officer determines the individual is not entitled to leave, they are technically considered to be "in custody", and the police officer will be required to read the individual their Miranda rights.

What To Do If I Think My Miranda Rights Have Been Violated

As soon as a police officer reads an individual his or her Miranda rights, and the individual invokes them, the police officer may no longer ask any further questions. All statements made by the individual, including confessions or admissions of guilt, cannot be used as evidence in court if the police officers continue to ask questions or interrogate the subject.

In spite of this, any prior evidence will still be admissible in court. The person who is seeking a dismissal of their DUI charges is not going to benefit from a thrown-out confession, since interrogations are not typically used to prove guilt in DUI cases. The case may be dismissed, or only the confession may be thrown out, in cases in which the majority of the evidence is based on a confession that was given in violation of Miranda rights. In either case, the prosecution will have to determine new ways to establish the defendant's guilt, which will strengthen the defendant's case. Miranda rights violations are often accompanied by legal issues that require a comprehensive understanding of criminal defense law. As a result, it is always advisable to consult with a Colorado criminal defense lawyer.