law enforcement

Question

The defendant was questioned at work by the police with others present while an audio recording was made. The defendant was told that she was suspected of a crime. No Miranda warning was given. The defendant admitted her involvement in the crime. The defendant was asked to go to the police station to make a written statement and was then allowed to go home. Was the defendant in custody at the time of the oral statement to the police?

Answer 1

Miranda warnings are required only when a person is undergoing custodial interrogation. Custodial is defined as whether a reasonable person would feel free to leave. Custody does not need to be someone in handcuffs or even someone who has been told they have been detained. A police officer blocking the suspects exit is enough. However, based on the information we have in this question, i.e., that the suspect was allowed to go home, it is unlikely that a court will find the interrogation was custodial. Additionally, interrogation is defined as any question, statement, or actions made with the intent of eliciting an incriminating response. In the present case, the suspect was questioned and responded with an admission. Interrogation was likely met, but remember for the Exclusionary Rule to apply there must be both custody and interrogation. Thus, no Miranda violation here.