Legal Question in Criminal Law in Indiana

Before the police can use anything you say to them as evidence against you, they have to inform you that you have a right to speak with an attorney, and the right to remain silent. The reason for this is so that an arrest is not used as a way to intimidate people into testifying against themselves or giving up their right to legal representation.

If law enforcement officers arrest you, and you tell them something before they explain these rights to you, the statement may be excluded from evidence when they attempt to charge you with a crime. This is especially true if they start asking you questions while you are under arrest, but have not been told of your rights.

However, the fact that they did not read you your rights does not make your arrest itself illegal. It just means that they may not be able to use statements you make against you.

I disagree with part of Mr. Butler's answer. He says that "if law enforcement officers arrest you, and you tell them something before they explain these rights to you, the statement may be excluded from evidence when they attempt to charge you with a crime." But only statements you make in response to their questions can be excluded. Anything you say on your own initiative will be fair game. That's true even after they Mirandize you.

Also, the exclusionary rule only applies after you have been taken into custody. For these purposes, "in custody" means something a bit different from what it means in normal conversation. Generally it means that a reasonable person would understand that he will not be free to leave after a relatively brief encounter with the police. There is no bright-line rule about when someone is or isn't in custody. For example, being handcuffed is evidence that you were in custody but it is not proof; there are circumstances in which someone can be handcuffed even though it is apparent that he will be released shortly.