In Whose Custody? Miranda, Emergency Medical Care & Criminal Defendants

Authors

Kayley Berger

Abstract

“Respect for the rule of law in all its dimensions is critical to the fair administration of justice, public order, and protection of fundamental freedoms.” The rule of law surrounding the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination will not be respected by the police or public at large until major loopholes that allow the police “to take advantage of indigence in the administration of justice” are closed. The major loophole this Note tackles is the “in custody” requirement for Miranda warnings, which allows officers to question suspects without providing them with a Miranda warning. Specifically, this Note focuses on the damage such a loophole causes in the context of emergency medical care. It considers scenarios in which the power dynamics are so severe the suspect involuntarily confesses to a crime. To close this specific loophole, courts must expand what is considered “custodial” to represent the actual judicial intent behind Miranda: protecting the disadvantaged from state coercion and abuse. This conclusion is rooted in the judicial ideology that is used in the other Criminal Constitutional Revolution cases, which all sought to protect against police tendency to take advantage of indigence. This Note is not seeking to expand the rights of the accused. Rather, it is focused on closing a loophole in an existing right.

Recommended Citation

Kayley Berger, In Whose Custody? Miranda, Emergency Medical Care & Criminal Defendants, 11 U.C. Irvine L. Rev. 1197 (2021).
Available at: https://scholarship.law.uci.edu/ucilr/vol11/iss4/10