Statement of Assignment: This memo is intended to investigate the following issues: Does the Officer’s actions towards Joe count as “custodial” “interrogation”? If so, does that negate the charge of Curfew violation?
Incident: A 14 year old boy, Joe, was allegedly seen by an officer on the steps to an apartment at 12:30 AM. His parents or guardians weren’t reported nearby, and he allegedly was attending a party at the time. The officer approached Joe, ordered him into the police car, and asked him for his name, date of birth, address, parents’ names, and parents’ phone number, citing him for curfew violation after the information was provided.
Issue 1: Was Joe placed into “Custody?”
Law: ““Custody” is defined
…show more content…
“Custody” is defined as a reasonable person’s liberty is retrained to the extent they believe they are not free to leave. “Interrogation” is defined as being asked any questions that would likely lead to an answer that would incriminate oneself.
Analysis: It is unclear whether there is a “custodial interrogation” or not. Interrogation is defined as “being asked any questions that would likely lead to an answer that would incriminate oneself”. Given the rule of law displayed, it is unclear whether being asked routine questions about one’s identity that would not incriminate a suspect normally but would for curfew violation counts as interrogation. He was not read his Miranda Rights, so it would likely not be an admissible “Custodial
…show more content…
A minor commits a curfew violation whenever they are out past 12:30 a.m. without parental supervision. If Joe had a parent supervising him, such as if they were at the party, there is no curfew violation, irrespective of any other factors. An improper interrogation does not change the fact that Joe was violating curfew (if he was), and will likely not be the method police could use to establish curfew violation. If the police cannot place Joe at the location but for his statements, then whether the interrogation is valid or not becomes