The Supreme Court decision in Miranda v. Arizona is a famous one, so what happens when the police violate Miranda by continuing to interrogate a suspect without informing him of his right to a lawyer or ignoring repeated requests for a lawyer? Generally, the only remedy is to suppress the evidence the police obtain through their illegal actions. But is there a lawsuit against the police?
Generally, courts have said no. In order to sue the police for violating your constitutional rights, you have to have a constitutional right at stake. Miranda rights are not themselves constitutional rights, but rather, they are 'prophylactics' - rules the police must follow in order to ensure that they do not violate your rights. I know this will strike some people as confusing, given that Miranda warnings have so become a part of our national consciousness. The fact is, the Fifth Amendment to the constitution provides that no person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
But I digress. There are a few cases out there where circumstances have been so severe that courts have allowed lawsuits to proceed. The first federal case was Cooper v. Dupnik, in the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The police in that case prepared a plan of interrogation even before they had a suspect. The police decided that they were going to purposefully ignore the suspect's request for a lawyer and keep pressing him and interrogating him. The police decided to due this to prevent the suspect from using an insanity defense and hoped to keep him off the stand entirely.
The court held that the police action was so outrageous, so intentionally beyond the pale, so constitutionally evil, that a lawsuit could proceed.
In the end, lawsuits against the police for Miranda violations will be rare, but when the right set of facts comes up, they can be powerful weapons against intentional police misconduct.
0 comments:
Post a Comment