3.4 Miranda Issues

• Library: Defense of Serious Traffic Cases in Virginia (Virginia CLE) (2022 Ed.)

3.4 MIRANDA ISSUES

3.401 Prearrest "Custody."

A "stop" is a Fourth Amendment detention, but such a detention is not custody for purposes of triggering the constitutional requirement that the defendant be read Miranda rights. In Miranda v. Arizona, ⁸²⁵ the United States Supreme Court established certain procedural safeguards to protect a suspect's constitutional right against self-incrimination but noted in Oregon v. Mathiason that "police officers are not required to administer Miranda warnings to everyone whom they question. . . . [The warnings] are required only where there has been such a restriction on a person's freedom as to render him 'in custody.'" ⁸²⁶ Police need not administer the warning using any particular words, as long as the substance of a suspect's Miranda rights are conveyed. ⁸²⁷

3.402 Facts and Circumstances.

For an interrogation to be characterized as custodial, the questioning must be initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody. ⁸²⁸ This need not take place after a formal arrest; it may also occur at a time when the defendant's freedom of action is curtailed. The facts to be considered in making this determination include (i) whether the questioning occurs in a place that is familiar or neutral, (ii) whether probable cause to arrest already exists, (iii) the number of police officers who are present, (iv) the degree of physical restraint that is exerted, (v) whether the defendant is already the target of the investigation, and (vi) the duration and character of the interrogation. ⁸²⁹ When determining "custody" for purposes of Miranda, "the initial step is to ascertain whether, in light of the 'objective circumstances of the interrogation' a 'reasonable person [would] have felt he or she was not at liberty to terminate the interrogation and leave.'" ⁸³⁰ "[T]he language used by the officer to summon the individual, the extent to which he or she is confronted with evidence of guilt, the physical surroundings of the interrogation, the duration of the detention and the degree of pressure applied to detain the individual" may be significant factors as well. ⁸³¹

The point at which an officer develops probable cause does not by itself determine whether a suspect is in custody. Whether an officer developed probable cause earlier than at the point when the formal arrest occurs is only one factor to be considered in determining whether the defendant was in formal custody. The test is whether the facts surrounding the stop indicate that a suspect's freedom of action is curtailed to a "degree associated with formal arrest." When a single police officer asks a motorist a modest number of questions and requests him or her to perform a simple balancing test at a place visible to passing motorists, such a limited contact cannot be characterized as the functional equivalent of formal arrest. ⁸³² Even when a person is in custody, the specific facts will dictate whether a person's Miranda rights were violated. ⁸³³

3.403 Investigative Detentions.

Investigative detentions, or Terry stops, ⁸³⁴ cannot be distinguished from custodial interrogation merely by an absence of restrictions upon the suspect's liberty, because an officer may have to restrain a suspect to effect the more limited investigative stop. For example, restraining a suspect for the officer's protection is considered appropriate in this situation.

Virginia cases have approved a variety of restraints, from an officer drawing a weapon to the transportation of a handcuffed suspect in the back of a police car, without finding that the restraint was the equivalent of an arrest. ⁸³⁵ But the stop in question must last only long enough to investigate the reasonable suspicion that attracted the officer's notice. ⁸³⁶ A police officer's repeated questioning of a defendant who had been stopped for a routine traffic violation did not amount to custodial interrogation for purposes of applying Miranda warnings, even though the officer did not have reasonable articulable suspicion. ⁸³⁷

A defendant's detention may continue even as long as 21 minutes without implicating Miranda if the officer never tells the defendant that he or she is not free to go, does not physically restrain the defendant in some way, does not use or display any weapons, and does not tell the defendant he...