A policeman investigating a rape spotted Quarles, who matched the rapist’s descr

Question

A policeman investigating a rape spotted Quarles, who matched the rapist’s description. When Quarles saw the policeman, he began to run toward the back of the store. After a chase, the policeman cornered the suspect and noticed that he had an empty shoulder holster. The policeman asked where the gun was. Quarles pointed and said, “The gun is over there.” The policeman retrieved the gun and then arrested Quarles. At this point, the Miranda warning was read to Quarles. Was the warning too late in violation of Quarles’s constitutional rights? Why or why not?

Business Law

Explanation / Answer

Miranda warning, is stated as follows,

Any person in custody or interrogation procedure must, prior to interrogation, be clearly informed that he/she has the right to remain silent, and that anything the person says will be used against that person in the court. Moreover, the person must be clearly informed that he/she has the right to consult with an attorney and to have that attorney present during questioning, and that, if he/she is indigent, an attorney will be provided at no cost to represent him/her.

Hence from the above stated case scenario the policeman before arresting Quarels did interrogated of the gun. But before any interrogation the Miranda Warning should have been spelled by the policeman.The gun beign an evidence of the criminal proceedings and the information on this specific evidence collection by the policeman is justified only after the Miranda warning is spelled out. But the policeman spelled it out after asking or enquiring about the whereabouts of Quarels, i.e. the information on gun. If , Miranda warning had been spelled out by the policeman , and even after that Quarels had chosen to answer the interrogation then there would neither be any violation of Miranda rights or Fifth amendment right of Quarels.

Miranda is based on the Sixth Amendment right to counsel and the Fifth Amendment right to remain silent.The Miranda warning is part of a preventive criminal procedure rule that law enforcement are required to administer to protect an individual who is in custody and subject to direct questioning or its functional equivalent from a violation of his or her Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination. Quarels have already provided information on the gun which might lead to his exposure to any accusation of crime, here rape. But even Miranda warning was not spelled by the policeman, he collected an evidence, the gun , which will be used in the court of law in the criminal procedings against Quarels, which might lead to his ownself-incrimination and thus violation of the Fifth Amendment constitutional right.

Hence there were violations of Miranda rights and thus the Fifth Amendment Right of being silent and compelled self-incrimination.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse A
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.