2/23/2018 - ANSWER - 2.23.18 NPD’s Law Question of the day.. The FRIDAY Edition!

NPD’s Law Question of the day.. The FRIDAY Edition!



A person has an arrest warrant issued against them for a domestic dispute related breach of peace violation that occurred a year prior. The person is stopped by police for a minor traffic violation and upon running the driver’s license information it is determined that the warrant exists. The person is advised of the warrant by the officer and is taken into custody and placed under arrest by being hand cuffed and placed into the back seat of the police car. The person is then transported to the Police Department where they are processed, booked and released on a $100.00 cash bond to appear in court the next morning.


This arrest is:

  1. VALID – The officer handled the situation properly and the arrest is valid
  2. INVALID – The officer handled the situation improperly as he failed to read the subject their Miranda Warning (“rights”) upon placing them under arrest, consequently invalidating the arrest.
  3. INVALID – The officer making the arrest did not question the arrested subject about the domestic dispute warrant, consequently invalidating the arrest.
  4. B&C are correct


Please make you selection in the response post - The correct answer will be posted later today … and as usual, whom ever answers correctly will win an EXCLUSIVE prize - Bragging rights that THEY answered correctly!!   … Come on and Play!!





The correct answer is A – This is a proper arrest


It is a common misconception that persons must be read their rights whenever they are arrested.

Through pop culture, TV and movies, most people know that in some cases the police are obligated to "read you your rights." Most can say what is contained within the warnings however most people don't know exactly what their Miranda rights are and when they apply.

The Miranda warnings originated in a U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, which set forth the following warning and accompanying rights:

  • You have the right to remain silent;
  • Anything you say can be used against you in a court of law;
  • You have the right to consult with a lawyer and have that lawyer present during the interrogation;
  • If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be appointed to represent you;
  • You can invoke your right to be silent before or during an interrogation, and if you do so, the interrogation must stop.
  • You can invoke your right to have an attorney present, and until your attorney is present, the interrogation must stop.

You might notice that the last two points from above are often omitted in pop culture references. In fact, many states have their own particular variation of Miranda requirements that their police officers must use, so the language differs slightly from one police department to another.

The most common addition to these core Miranda rights has been that there is an understanding of the rights, a suspect must affirmatively respond that they understand these rights, and courts will not interpret silence as a sufficient acknowledgment of the Miranda warning.

Knowing this about Miranda Warnings, most people don’t fully understand that Miranda Warnings don’t always apply …There are two very basic conditions that have to exist before the police must issue a Miranda warning to a suspect:

  • The suspect is in police custody
  • The suspect is under interrogation

It's crucial to understand these conditions because if you aren't formally in police custody, and you aren't being interrogated, the police don't have to give you a Miranda warning. This, in turn, means that the police can use anything you say until those two requirements are fulfilled as evidence against you.

"Police custody" is generally defined as anytime the police deprive you of your freedom of action in a significant way. Realistically though, it means being arrested. Some jurisdictions treat detentions differently than arrests, though, and a Miranda warning isn't required in such a situation.

Generally speaking, an actual arrest must take place before the police need to give you a Miranda warning. This means that simple things such as traffic stops or a police officer walking up to you and asking you questions are not considered police custody. When in doubt, just stay silent (except for the exception about identification discussed below).

Police Interrogation – a Miranda Warning must come before you are being interrogated, so until the interrogation has begun, you are not necessarily owed a Miranda warning. A request for a driver’s license or identification is generally not considered an interrogation, the same holds true for the booking process. Once however, the police begin asking questions that may implicate involvement in a crime, an interrogation has begun.

In the situational question provided the officer did take the subject into custody, however the officer did not need to ask the arrested individual about the crime for which they were arrested nor did he have an obligation too. For this reason the officer did not need to mirandize the individual.

Thanks for playing everyone and congrats to our winners …. Brag it up – You earned it!!