Also known as: incustodial interrogation · in custody interrogation · custodial interrogation
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
Questioning by law enforcement of a suspect whose freedom of movement is restrained to the degree associated with formal arrest. The restraint must be such that a reasonable person would not feel free to terminate the encounter and leave.
After Iain Irons invoked his right to counsel during questioning about a robbery, officers later approached him in custody and asked about an unrelated arson. The new questions occurred without counsel present and without Iain reinitiating contact. Any statements obtained are inadmissible because the initial invocation blocked further police-initiated interrogation on any topic.
Ibrahim Iqbal was pulled over for a minor traffic violation. Officers then escorted him to a ranger station room and questioned him intensively for thirty minutes about suspected environmental crimes without warnings. The extended stationhouse questioning converted the encounter into custodial interrogation requiring Miranda warnings.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Isabella Ingram requested counsel during initial questioning at a store. She consulted an attorney that night. The next day a detective summoned her to a precinct room and questioned her without counsel present. The statements must be suppressed because police reinitiated custodial interrogation after the invocation.
Imran Iyer was transported to a police station and placed in a locked interview room. Detectives questioned him at length about vehicle identification numbers without providing any warnings. Statements obtained during this custodial interrogation are inadmissible absent the required advisements and a valid waiver.
Ira Irving walked into a police station and began speaking with officers about a crime. Officers later handcuffed him and continued questioning. Once the custodial relationship formed, further interrogation without warnings or counsel violated the Fifth Amendment protections triggered by in-custodial interrogation.
Iain Irons clearly requested counsel during stationhouse questioning. The next day a different detective returned to his cell and resumed questioning about the same matter without counsel present. The second round of statements is inadmissible because police reinitiated custodial interrogation after the invocation.
Custody arises when a suspect is taken from the roadside to a stationhouse room and subjected to sustained accusatory questioning. The extended duration and isolated setting convert a brief traffic encounter into the functional equivalent of formal arrest.
Supporting sources
No. Once the right to counsel is invoked, police may not reinitiate custodial interrogation without counsel present even if the suspect has already met with an attorney. The invocation remains in effect until the suspect reinitiates contact.
Supporting sources
Transporting a suspect to a police station in a marked cruiser and confining the person in a locked interview room for sustained questioning constitutes the functional equivalent of an arrest. Probable cause is required for that level of seizure.
Supporting sources
An ambiguous remark such as 'Maybe I really should have a lawyer' does not clearly invoke the right to counsel. Officers may continue questioning unless the suspect makes an unambiguous request for counsel.
Supporting sources
…follow but briefly stated it is this: the prosecution may not use statements, whether exculpatory or inculpatory, stemming from custodial interrogation of the defendant unless it demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the privilege against self-incrimination. By custodial interrogation, we mean questioning…