In the presented case, Hand is entitled to Mirada warnings, which are read to an arrestee by the police. Miranda warnings guard against self-incrimination and gives an individual the right to remain silent, the right to an attorney, and warning that anything they say can be used against them in court ( Miranda v. Arizona ). If the arrestee cannot afford an attorney, Miranda rights require that one be appointed by the court. In the case scenario, Hand was not read his Miranda rights before being arrested. Hand reveals that he has hired Alex Jaxon to plant a bomb in the capital city area, which is self-incriminatory.
The fact that Hand is not an American citizen does not affect his right to constitutional provisions such as the Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. Constitutional provisions such as the right to remain silent apply to all persons within the United States, which comprises both documented and undocumented immigrants ( Cole, Smith & DeJong, 2014) . Furthermore, the constitution applies to all persons with the United States, except in the case of diplomatic immunity. Though constitutional rights continues to be diluted by the introduction of exemptions, non-citizens are entitled to similar constitutional protections within the confines of a criminal investigation carried out in the United States.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Hand’s questioning by the police is custodial. Custodial means that the suspect is in police custody. It does not imply that the suspect is in handcuffs, but he or she has been denied freedom to act in any significant way ( Rokutani, 2018) . “Interrogation” is questioning by the police and include asking the suspect direct questions or making comments that may lead to self-incriminatory statements. In the current scenario, Hand’s freedom of any action is restricted by the police pointing shotguns at him, making it custodial. Furthermore, the questions asked by the police such as demands to know what he is planning led to self-incriminatory replies such as revealing his plan to plant a bomb at the city Arena. All these factors placed both physical and psychological limitations on the suspect during questioning.
McFadden’s statements regarding Jaxon family does not constitute custodial interrogation. When determining whether an interrogation is custodial, the courts consider several factors. These factors determine how compelling, coercive, or intimidation the environment was. Some of these factors include the number of officers, location of the questioning, use of physical restraints, use of force, and informing if the interview is voluntary ( Brezina, 2011) . McFadden does not use force or restraints on the suspect, he simply informs him that his mother and brothers are at the concert. Though the suspect was not free to leave the end of the interview because he was under arrest, the officer juts informed of him of facts that forced him to reveal the bomb’s location.
Hand’s statement cannot be used against him in a court of law. Since he was interrogated by the police without reading his Miranda rights first, his statements are involuntary and cannot be used against in court. Though the information did led to the discovery of the bomb, his statements were self-incriminatory. However, Jaxon’s statements can be used against him in a court of law because he revealed the location of the bomb to protect his family, but not through intimidation or coercion. Furthermore, the interrogation by McFadden was not custodial. Jaxon cannot testify against Hand because he is also a defendant in the case. Under Fifth Amendment provisions, a person cannot testify if he or she is a defendant in a criminal case ( Stuart, 2004) .
References
Brezina, C. (2011). The Fifth Amendment: Double jeopardy, self-incrimination, and due process of law . New York: Rosen Central.
Cole, G., Smith, C., and DeJong, C. (2014). The American System of Criminal Justice . New York: Cengage Learning.
Miranda v. Arizona, 386 U.S. 436 (1966)
Rokutani, J. (2018). Double jeopardy, self-incrimination, and due process of law: The Fifth Amendment . New York: Enslow Publishing.
Stuart, G. L. (2004). Miranda: The story of America's right to remain silent . Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
