Usually, the answer is no. Police are only required to read you Miranda warnings if you are placed into custody and then questioned.

In the context of a drunk driving arrest, there are really two sets of rights that should be read to a suspect by the police; the Miranda rights and the chemical test rights. The Miranda rights are the rights that most of us are familiar with, and address your right to speak with an attorney before questioning. A reading of the Miranda rights will include an affirmative statement by the police that what you say can be used against you in Court.

Failure to advise you of your Miranda rights does not automatically result in dismissal of the case against you. It is possible to get your statements thrown out in certain circumstances, but you should discuss the facts of your case fully with a knowledgeable and experienced criminal law attorney at Paul J. Tafelski, P.C. Contact us today.

Answer: Many people are under the mistaken belief, a mistaken belief, that the police must always read people their Miranda rights any time they make a DUI arrest. Unfortunately, however, there is no automatic requirement that the DUI officer read you your rights as part of every Orange County DUI arrest. The Miranda rights are only required when both (1) you've been placed under arrest for an Orange County DUI and (2) the DUI officer continues to interrogate you.

No. However, the state might be prevented from using any evidence collected after the failure to read you your "Miranda Warnings". It is important that you hire a good attorney that is knowledgeable about this area of the law.

Probably not. Not being properly advised of your Constitutional rights may have consequences that will impact the ultimate outcome of your case, but the mere fact that you were not properly advised does not mean your case is automatically dismissed. It is an issue that should be brought to the attention of your attorney so that appropriate legal remedies can be sought.

Most likely, no. These "rights" are referred to as Miranda rights, coming from a Supreme Court case Miranda v. Arizona.

Miranda v. Arizona is a famous case in which the United States Supreme Court held that before a confession is admissible in court against a suspect, (1) the police must have informed the suspect that he has a right to counsel and to remain silent, and (2) that the suspect must have intelligently, knowingly and voluntarily waived those rights. However, this only applies to custodial interrogation.

In a typical DUI stop most police officers are trained that they do not have to read these particular rights before they begin to question you regarding the events that lead up to the traffic stop. They are also trained to ask certain questions to elicit voluntary admissions of drinking or using recreational drugs.

The police have to read you your Miranda rights if they intend to question you after you are in custody. If they don't do that after your arrest and before questioning you, evidence the police obtained from your statements and the statements themselves might be excluded at trial. Although most DUI cases are based upon scientific evidence, such as a breath or blood test, a skilled DUI defense attorney can determine whether a motion to exclude evidence is warranted in your case.

Probably not. But if you were interrogated after being placed in custody, those statements cannot be used against you.

There is a common misconception that when an officer fails to read a person their Miranda Rights (i.e., "You have the right to remain silent, you have a right to an attorney. . .") the case will be dismissed. The Miranda warning only affect the admissibility of statements made by an accused after the person is arrested.

The police are not required to read you your rights unless they want to talk to you once you are in custody. Everyone has heard of the "Miranda Rights." This phrase comes from the case of Miranda v. Arizona, where the United States Supreme Court stated that before a law enforcement officer can question a person who is in custody, they must tell them their rights.

No. The officer is supposed to give a 5th Amendment warning after he arrests you. Often, however, they do not. The only consequence is that the prosecution cannot use any of your answers to questions asked by the police after the arrest. Of more consequence in most cases is the failure to advise you of the state's "implied consent" law - that is, your legal obligation to take a chemical test and the results if you refuse. This can effect the suspension of your license.

The officer is supposed to give a Fifth Amendment Miranda Warning after he arrests you. Sometimes, however, they do not. If they fail to give you a Miranda Warning, the consequence is that the prosecution cannot use any of your answers to questions asked by the police after the arrest. Agreed, it is completely unfair.

Answer: Under Florida law, a law enforcement officer may seize the driver's license of any person who is driving with an unlawful blood alcohol level of 0.08% or above, or who has refused to submit to a breath, blood or urine test.

Refuse any additional search beyond a "pat down". The police may "pat-down" your clothing if they suspect you are carrying a concealed weapon. Remain silent. Do not volunteer any incriminating information. Do not say "I had two beers." You have the right to refuse to take any field sobriety tests. You have the right to refuse the preliminary breath test on the side of the road but it will result in a ticket with a fine that is currently $125.