Yes. The issue is custody. When a person is in police custody they should be given Miranda if the police intend to use their answers against them. Until they're in custody (not allowed to leave) authorities can question a person to any degree they wish.
Yes if they deem you unable to comprehend the question. i.e. you're drunk.
The Miranda Rights have nothing to do with a search or seizure. The Miranda Rights are only read prior to a custodial interrogation, which a search and/or seizure is not.
no a poice officer is only required to read your Miranda rights when he is about to interrogate you about the crime in question.
Miranda rights are necessary to let people know what rights they have when they are taken into custody. Without them a suspect may not know that they do not have to answer the law officers' questions immediately. The suspect may feel like they have to confess whether or not they committed the crime.
The legal branch of the government is most responsible for the Miranda Rights. The rights are written into the law in the 5th and 6th amendments to the Constitution. In 1966 the supreme court set a precedent for these rights to be read to anyone accused of a crime.
Miranda rights are the rights that all Americans have that are relevant to suspects in investigations. They must be read as a suspect is taken into custody. They include the right to remain silent, and the right to an attorney.Note that there is no such thing as "Miranda Rights". The actual thing in question is termed a "Miranda Warning", since what is happening is a notification of your (already existing) Constitution Rights (under the 5th and 6th Amendments). What the Miranda v Arizona case defined was that police are required to inform you of your 5th and 6th Amendment Rights during questioning after arrest (this required notification is what often confusingly called "Miranda Rights").
The most prominent exception to the Miranda rule is the public safety exception. This exception allows law enforcement to question a suspect without reading their Miranda rights if there is an urgent concern for public safety, such as the need to address a potential threat or prevent harm to others.
As long as you are advised of your Miranda rights beforequestioning is begun it does not matter. Miranda rights are not about being arrested they are about what your rights are during questioning.
It seems to be used this way: Miranda warning, or Miranda rights. Miranda is capitalized because it is the last name of the defendant who sued to bring these rights into law.
The Miranda rights were not vetoed. They are in use today. They come from the amendments to the Constitution.
No, Miranda rights are specific to the United States only. Even if you have similar rights in another country, it is incorrect to call them "Miranda rights." The name "Miranda rights" comes from the US Supreme Court case "Miranda v. Arizona" which established that a person being questioned by the police must be advised of his or her right to have an attorney present, and of certain other rights.
No.No.No.No.