Yes, a person still has the same Miranda rights if arrested by federal agents. The reading of the Miranda rights is a national precedent. This means that all law enforcement agencies are required to read them.
No. "Miranda" rights didn't exist until well after that war ended. I don't recall if there were any spies still out there by the time Miranda was announced.
The 5th Amendment of the U.S. Bill of Rights, which protects U.S. citizens against self-incrimination, is the basis for our Miranda Rights. However, in order for Miranda to apply, two elements must be present: 1. the suspect is in police custody, AND 2. the suspect is being asked questions by police that are likely to invoke incriminating statements. Both CUSTODY and INTERROGATION must be present before Miranda applies. A police officer does not have to advise a suspect of their Miranda rights when either of these elements are absent.
No, it is still necessary to protect the rights of the accused.
The Supreme Court has ruled that reading of Miranda Rights is no longer necessary, that the people of the US have been so inundated with it, that all know it. Most Law Enforcement Officers still read it as a matter of protocol or department policy though. An extradition warrant is another matter, however. The person being extradited is already in custody, has already been arrested, and arrest is the time that Miranda is typically read. US Marshals at this point are simply transporting a prisoner.
If you are a minor then nothing. If you are not a minor then chances are it will not affect anything unless you can prove the cop did not read them...because the court is going to take the word of a police officer over that of some random person.
This makes the judicial court organized because it help the judges be fair to the citizens of America.
If one is not read his Miranda rights (the right to remain silent, and the right to speak to an attorney), anything that he says that is self-incriminating cannot be used in court as evidence.This means that officials can still interrogate and act upon any information gleaned, but that information cannot be used in court.These "Miranda rights" stem from a 1966 US Supreme Court decision, Miranda v. Arizona, in which Ernesto Miranda's conviction was overturned because he was not informed of his Constitutional right to remain silent and consult with a lawyer.
Miranda is still on te house of paynes
The due process model ensures that there are enough impediments at every step in the criminal justice system to prevent people being pushed through. The Miranda rights remind suspects that they are not assumed guilty and they still have rights. Both are important because more innocent people would be sentenced without them.
Rights after arrest Under federal constitutional law, the police need to read you your rights only prior to CUSTODIAL INTERROGATION. So, if there is no interrogation, they do not have to read you your rights.
Yeah, she swears in songs and stuff. But she is still a great person who loves her fans!
The police have to read you your rights ONLY IF they want to question you and use your answers against you later in a court of law. If you have made a statement and the police have not read you your rights AND a judge thinks that this really what happened, then your statement cannot be used against you at trial. Obviously it is going to be your word against the police. You can still be prosecuted as long as there is enough evidence without using the statement. Other than that, the police do not have to tell you anything.