Miranda Update: Fifth Amendment Protection and Break in Custody

By Myers, Kenneth A. | The FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, May 2010 | Go to article overview

Miranda Update: Fifth Amendment Protection and Break in Custody


Myers, Kenneth A., The FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin


Because of the great value a statement obtained from a defendant has in a criminal prosecution, the government will invariably face a challenge to its admissibility. The most recognized challenge, to both law enforcement and the public at large, is an alleged violation of the Fifth Amendment protection adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court in Miranda v. Arizona. (1) While this challenge is well-known and over four decades old, its precise contours still are being established. Over the years, the Supreme Court has decided cases in which it reexamined the applicability and scope of Miranda. Now is one of those times. The purpose of this article is to discuss the recent decision of Maryland v. Shatzer, (2) where the Supreme Court ruled upon the legal significance and definition of a break in custody in terms of the Fifth Amendment privilege against compelled self-incrimination (Miranda). Law enforcement officers must have an understanding of this decision and its holding given its impact on their ability to engage in interrogation during various stages of a criminal investigation.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Prior Relevant Case Law

To best understand the significance of Maryland v. Shatzer, it is important to provide a brief overview of previous Fifth Amendment case law. In Miranda v. Arizona, (3) the Supreme Court created a set of measures to protect a defendant's Fifth Amendment privilege against compelled self-incrimination by requiring law enforcement officers to provide certain warnings and obtain a waiver from a defendant prior to custodial interrogation. (4) The rationale behind the Miranda rule is to protect a defendant from the "inherently compelling pressures" (5) and the "police-dominated atmosphere" (6) of custodial interrogation. In Miranda, the Court created two basic prophylactic measures to protect a defendant's Fifth Amendment rights: the right to silence and the right to counsel. (7) When law enforcement provides the warnings required by Miranda, a defendant may relinquish these rights through a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver or may invoke one or both of the rights. (8)

In subsequent cases, the Supreme Court has ruled that once a defendant invokes the Fifth Amendment right to counsel, (9) any current interrogation must cease and the defendant may not be subjected to further police-initiated custodial interrogation unless counsel is present. (10) This second layer of protection, often referred to as the Edwards (11) rule, creates a presumption that once a suspect invokes the Fifth Amendment right to counsel, any waiver of that right in response to a subsequent police-initiated attempt at custodial interrogation is involuntary. (12) The rationale behind the Edwards rule is that after the invocation of the right to counsel, "any subsequent waiver that has come at the authorities' behest, and not at the suspect's own instigation, is itself the product of the 'inherently compelling pressures' and not the purely voluntary choice of the suspect." (13)

It also must be remembered that this two-layered Fifth Amendment protection in Miranda and Edwards is not crime specific. Once a defendant invokes the Fifth Amendment right to counsel for one offense, the defendant may not be subjected to police-initiated interrogation regarding any offense while remaining in custody unless counsel is present. (14)

To date, lower courts uniformly have held that the Edwards protection ends with a break in custody. (15) While not specifically ruling on the issue, the Supreme Court in McNeil v. Wisconsin (16) used language (in dicta) indicating that the Edwards protection applies "assuming there is no break in custody." (17) In Maryland v. Shatzer, (18) the Supreme Court expressly ruled on this issue. In addition, in this case, the Court also addressed the impact of incarceration following a conviction--as opposed to pretrial custody--on the break-in-custody analysis. In other words, the Court decided whether a defendant who is serving time in a prison setting is deemed in continuous custody as some lower courts have ruled. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Miranda Update: Fifth Amendment Protection and Break in Custody
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.