Miranda Rights Eroded In New Jersey
The New Jersey state Supreme Court has recently held that police did not have to re-administer Miranda warnings to a defendant once they let him know, mid-interrogation, he was under suspicion.
In this case, the defendant was called and asked to come to the station house to discuss whether his uncle had sexually abused his 9 year old niece. The defendant was given the Miranda warnings but was not told that he was a possible suspect. After the brief statement, a conversation followed in which the defendant admitted that he had also sexually abused the victim.
The interrogation resumed with no fresh warnings. The defendant went on to tell of the sexual abuse that he had committed on his niece. He later tried to retract the confession, claiming he falsely implicated himself to try to get help for his niece with regard to the abuse inflicted by his uncle.
The defendant was convicted of aggravated sexual assault, sexual assault and endangering the welfare of a child and sentenced to 18 years in prison.
The Appellate Division reversed, in a published opinion the Court stated that the defendant should have been re-Mirandized once he was informed he was a suspect because until then, he could not knowingly waive his rights.
The New Jersey state Supreme Court reversed the Appellate Division and held that the trial court properly applied the totality-of-the-circumstances test in deciding whether the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his Miranda rights. The following factors were taken into consideration:
Whether statements that are made, either with Miranda warnings or without, are admissible is constantly changing and being challenged. Most of these cases are very fact specific. If you have been charged with a crime and you have given any kind of a statement, it is of paramount importance that you have an experienced criminal defense attorney review all of the facts to make sure that your rights are properly protected.
