California  |  Criminal Law

Legal Question

Asked on: 12/28/12, 3:19 pm

I was arrested Sunday night for two felonies. Throughout the entire process I was never read my miranda rights. What does this mean for my case?

6 Answers


Answered on: 12/28/12, 3:29 pm by Joe Dane

It's not like on TV or in the movies. Just being arrested doesn't mean they have to read you your rights. They are required to advise you of the Miranda rights when you're in custody (arrested) AND being questioned. Many cases involve arrests and no Miranda rights being given. If there is a Miranda violation, the remedy is to exclude any statement (and evidence obtained from that statement), but it won't necessarily invalidate the whole case. It may poke enough holes in the case where the prosecution cannot proceed, but not having your rights read doesn't automatically mean the whole case is out.

Discuss the situation fully with your attorney.


Did you find this answer helpful?

0 Users found this answer helpful.

0 Attorneys agree with this answer.


Law Office of Joe Dane 850 E. Chapman Ave., Suite C Orange, CA 92866

Other answers from this attorney

Answered on: 12/28/12, 3:32 pm by Anthony Roach

Not much unless you answered questions while in custody.


Did you find this answer helpful?

0 Users found this answer helpful.

0 Attorneys agree with this answer.


Law Office of Anthony A. Roach 9909 Topanga Canyon, Ste.313 Chatsworth, CA 91311

Other answers from this attorney

Answered on: 12/28/12, 3:33 pm by Edward Hoffman

Probably not much. Miranda warnings are not always necessary. Police officers are well-versed in the applicable law. When they don't give a Miranda warning it's often because there is no need for one. Of course, sometimes the officers are wrong and fail to give a warning when they should.

The lack of a Miranda warning is not a get-out-of-jail-free card. If you were questioned without counsel while you were in custody, the government may not use your answers as evidence against you. It also may not use any evidence that it found as a result of those answers unless it can show that it would have found the evidence anyway. Note that there are some exceptions to these rules; evidence that falls within one of those exceptions may be used against you even without a Miranda warning.

The government is still free to prosecute you and to use against you any evidence it obtained by other means or that falls within the exceptions I mentioned above.


Did you find this answer helpful?

0 Users found this answer helpful.

0 Attorneys agree with this answer.


Law Offices of Edward A. Hoffman 11755 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1250 Los Angeles, CA 90025

Other answers from this attorney

Answered on: 12/28/12, 5:44 pm by Brian McGinity

Mr. Dane and Mr. Hoffman are both correct and they have provided you with excellent information. The general public's understanding of Miranda and how it effects the outcome of a criminal case is very distorted. TV and the movies rarely get it right.

Miranda rights attach once two things happen. First, someone is arrested/placed into custody and two, governmental questioning begins. If someone is not in custody (they have not been arrested) and officers ask questions and the answers to those questions lead to that person being arrested then Miranda probably was not violated. So any information offered freely before a suspect is placed into custody is free game. However, if someone is arrested and they make an incriminating statement without any questions being asked then once again Miranda probably has not been violated.

Attorneys are always arguing that although a suspect was not told he was under arrest that for all practical purposes they were arrested because they were not free to leave. As such they should have been given their Miranda rights before the officer's asked the questions.

Good luck


Did you find this answer helpful?

0 Users found this answer helpful.

0 Attorneys agree with this answer.


McGinity Law Office Alhambra Drive Cameron Park, 95682

Other answers from this attorney

Answered on: 12/29/12, 2:08 pm by Terry A. Nelson

Nothing, unless the prosecutor attempts to introduce into evidence a confession obtained after arrest but before Miranda advisement.


Did you find this answer helpful?

0 Users found this answer helpful.

0 Attorneys agree with this answer.


Nelson & Lawless 18685 Main St., #175 Huntington Beach, CA 92648

Other answers from this attorney

Answered on: 12/31/12, 12:17 pm by Edward Hoffman

Mr. Nelson's answer suggests that, without a Miranda warning, any confession made while the defendant was in custody must be excluded. That is not correct. The confession would only have to be excluded if it was given in response to questioning by the police or other authorities. (Even then, it would be admissible if one of the exceptions I mentioned in my earlier answer applies.) A confession that the defendant offers on his own would be admissible, even if the police should have given a Miranda warning but didn't.

Let me add that Mr. Nelson surely did not mean to give this impression. He's very knowledgeable about such matters. But the way he phrased his answer could lead some readers to misunderstand.


Did you find this answer helpful?

0 Users found this answer helpful.

0 Attorneys agree with this answer.


Law Offices of Edward A. Hoffman 11755 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1250 Los Angeles, CA 90025

Other answers from this attorney

Didn't find what you were looking for? Ask an Attorney!

Get answers from the top Attorneys
Ask Question

209 Answers given in the last few hours.

8662 Active attorneys ready to answer your question

Search Past Answers:
  Advanced Search