Created by FindLaw's team of legal writers and editors | Last reviewed February 12, 2019
This article has been written and reviewed for legal accuracy, clarity, and style by FindLaw’s team of legal writers and attorneys and in accordance with our editorial standards.
The last updated date refers to the last time this article was reviewed by FindLaw or one of our contributing authors. We make every effort to keep our articles updated. For information regarding a specific legal issue affecting you, please contact an attorney in your area.
We have all seen television programs that show police interrogating someone, but is that fact or fiction? What do the police actually do during an interrogation? Do I have to talk to the police? What rights do I have during an interrogation. Read on for answers to some of the most frequently asked questions about police interrogations.
If the police have "probable cause," a reasonable belief that a person has committed a crime, it is unnecessary to obtain a warrant before making an arrest. However, the police must obtain a warrant when arresting a person in their home if it is for a non-serious offense and there is not a reasonable belief that the person will destroy evidence or harm the public. The arrest warrant must establish that a crime was committed, that the person named on the warrant committed the crime, and the warrant must comply with the rules of the court.
The police can stop a person if they have a good faith belief that the person was involved in a crime. Under the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, a person does not have to answer questions. The law, however, does require people to give their name if requested. This means that if questioned about a crime by the police, a person is not required to respond beyond giving their name.
No. The police do not need to give the Miranda warnings before making an arrest. To use self-incriminating evidence against a person at trial, however, the police must give Miranda warnings or an equivalent warning before questioning a person.
In 1966, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Miranda v. Arizona that the police must advise people of their rights before a law enforcement officer questions those in police custody. Custody refers to the deprivation of a person's freedom of action in a significant way.
To use the information the police gather in interrogations at trial, the police must give full warnings. A typical Miranda warning consists of the following:
"You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you. If you decide to answer questions, you have the right to stop at any time."
If the police fail to give a Miranda warning before questioning a person in custody, the evidence gathered from the interview cannot be used against the person in a trial. If the interrogation leads to the collection of additional evidence, the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine precludes the use of this evidence against the person in a trial.
No. A prosecutor can still bring charges against suspects even if the police failed to give Miranda warnings before conducting police interrogations. While prosecutors cannot use evidence gathered during police interrogations at trial if the defendant was not Mirandized, the prosecutor can use other evidence to secure a conviction.
Yes. Miranda warnings give a person the right to stop a police interrogation at any time even if they already waived the right to remain silent. A person can assert this right by refusing to answer any more questions, requesting to speak with an attorney, or by requesting to remain silent. Once a person asserts Miranda rights, the police must discontinue the interrogation.
The police are prohibited from using physical or psychological coercion when conducting police interrogations. A confession or evidence that results from coercive tactics is inadmissible at trial. The police, for example, may not use torture techniques, threats, drugging, or inhumane treatment during an interrogation. The police, however, can use lying, trickery, and other types of non-coercive methods to obtain a confession from a suspect.
According to the U.S. Supreme Court, the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination applies to communication and does not prohibit the police from collecting physical bodily evidence. The police can collect evidence like blood and hair samples without permission.
If you've been interrogated by the police, you know what a scary and often-times intimidating situation that can be. It's important that the police follow the law and remained within the boundaries of your constitutional rights during their interrogations. If you have an questions about police interrogations, or if you've been charged with a crime, it's a good idea to contact a local criminal defense lawyer to get your questions answered and discuss your case.
Was this helpful?
Contact a qualified criminal lawyer to make sure your rights are protected.
Get tailored advice and ask your legal questions. Many attorneys offer free consultations.