This is a complicated issue, because Miranda would be triggered once someone was in custody and it is always a battleground regarding the issue of what point in the interaction between the police officer and a citizen the person would be considered to be in custody. Once the person was in custody, Miranda would be triggered and the police would have to read the person the Miranda warning.
Any statements the defendant made would be inadmissible in court, and the evidence that the police found as a direct result of those statements would also not be admissible under the fruits of the poisonous tree doctrine, if the judge found that someone was in custody and they had not been read the Miranda, unless the state could show that they could have, would have, or were able to find that evidence through a different source other than the defendant’s statements.
Would A Case Be Dismissed If Someone Claimed They Had Not Been Read Their Miranda Rights?
If the person was not read their Miranda rights and they were taken into custody, then any statements they made would not be admissible.
If the state’s case was based primarily on those statements, or evidence that was found because of those statements and not from another source, then the state’s case would be weakened so much that rather than lose a trial, they would tend to just dismiss it. It would not be an automatic get-out-of-trouble-free card, but it would have significant impact on a case, because either it could get dismissed or it would give enough bargaining leverage to get the charges substantially reduced.
For more information on Miranda Rights and DUI, a free initial consultation is your next best step. Get the information and legal answers you’re seeking by calling (301) 892-6007 today.