Lawyer David Serna: What Are Miranda Rights

 As all of us see on television shows or movies, whenever officers arrest someone, they immediately recite the suspect's Miranda rights. Unlike what many believe, lawyer David Serna reminds us that if a police offer does not read your rights and obtained evidence from you may be inadmissible as evidence in court.

 

More accurately known as Miranda warning, Miranda rights were made as a part of the common vernacular after the U.S. Supreme Court of Miranda vs. Arizona. In this case, the Supreme Court decided that all suspects must be immediately advised of their rights. Lawyer David Serna believes that this is crucial for suspected individuals since every action or word they say may significantly affect their legal proceedings. Lawyer David Serna also reminds individuals that the location of interrogation does not matter. Whether it occurred in jail, the streets, at the scene of the crime, or even in a car, the police must read the Miranda rights to the person if they want to use the person's responses as evidence. However, if the person is not in police custody as he or she makes admissions, then the information can be used against the person later on legal proceedings. “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you. Do you understand the rights I have just read to you? With these rights in mind, do you wish to speak to me?”

 

Remember that officers recite the individual's Miranda rights if there is an intention to interrogate the suspected individual under custody. However, the police can still arrest the suspect without the Miranda warning. Lawyer David Serna believes that whatever may happen, suspected individuals must invoke their Miranda rights. Before or during the interrogation, tell the police that you would want to stay silent until your lawyer arrives. If you need any legal assistance, lawyer David Serna is available for consultations during COVID. Either by email, telephone, video conferencing, and in-person visits under strict disinfecting protocol and masks requirements.

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Impeaching a Witness Based on Inconsistencies

One way to undermine the evidence of an opponent is to impeach his or her witnesses based on inconsistencies in his or her testimony. Lawyers are always advised to listen during the direct and cross-examination because this is the perfect time to observe the testimony and behavior of the witnesses of their opponent. David Serna, a lawyer of over 40 years, offers helpful tips to both new and experienced lawyers. Today, he discusses prior statements of witnesses governed by the Federal Rules on Evidence 613. Discrepancies in testimonies are expected when several witnesses are testifying to the same incident. It is but natural that these individuals remember the details of the incident differently.   However, lawyers should consider only those errors and testimonial inconsistencies that are significant and deserving of the jury’s attention. Persistently bringing up minor inconsistencies will only waste the time of the court and will most likely annoy the jury. FRE 613 prov...
Read more

Cross-Examination of a Crash Reconstructionist

Crash reconstruction is a science that involves mathematics and physics to determine what happened before, during, and after a collision. Reconstruction witnesses testify about the details of a collision, such as the speed of a vehicle, the cause of a collision, and the motion of the vehicle before and after an impact. David Serna, a lawyer of over 40 years, advises young prosecutors in preparing for the cross-examination of defense reconstruction witnesses. The prosecutor must know whether the evidence or data gathered and used by the witness supports a reliable conclusion. Here are three things to remember before conducting a cross-examination of reconstruction witnesses. 1.        Review the crash report It is important to read the crash report of the opponent’s expert crash reconstructionist. The prosecutor’s crash reconstructionist can help him understand the factors considered by the opponent’s reconstruction witness and determine the shor...
Read more

The Rules on Preliminary Hearing and Trial

Preliminary Hearings take place before a judge and only after the prosecutor has filed charges against a person. These hearings are not trials, which may be conducted before a group of individuals, called a grand jury. There are, however, procedural rules on trial that similarly apply to preliminary hearings. In this brief article, David Serna, a lawyer and educator for many years, discusses some of the rules that apply to preliminary hearings and trials. Like a trial, an ordinary witness can testify during a preliminary hearing. Generally, the testimony must be based on what they perceive and not on opinion. However, during a preliminary hearing, unlike a trial, hearsay evidence is allowed and admissible. Three things can happen after a preliminary hearing. If the charges are weak and unfounded, the judge would most likely dismiss the case outright. If there is, however, a finding of probable cause, the judge may either reduce or retain the charges made by the prosecutor...
Read more