Must civilian read someone their miranda rights if they place them under arrest?

[Mosinshooter762]

I recommend not to read Miranda when exercising a citizens arrest.

[angus]

Rule is right on, as always. The purpose of Miranda (which is a "prophylactic" right based on other Amendments) is to protect citizens from the government, not other citizens. There are two triggers for it: custody and interrogation. Police only HAVE to Mirandize when the suspect is in custody AND when they are going to ask questions designed to elicit incriminating responses. Even if they don't it doesn't mean the guy automatically goes free, it just means that whatever the suspect says is excluded from evidence at trial. Police may Mirandize on arrest as a matter of agency policy, of course, even if they do not ask incriminating questions at that time.

There was a common practice of LEO's questioning suspects without Miranda, getting the admission/confession, then Mirandizing and telling the suspects that they might as well repeat the confession since they already gave it up. That practice was declared unconstitutional in a fairly recent (2005, I think) SCOTUS decision that I am too lazy to look up right now.

Standard disclaimer-IANAL.

Citizens carrying a Miranda card and zip ties while "arresting" suspects are probably going to run into trouble with the real cops and the subsequent lawsuits. You will come off as some cop wanna-be and detract from your own credibility in a situation where your credibility may be very important.

[larrymeyer]

I recommend not to read Miranda when exercising a citizens arrest.

I agree if you don't know Miranda you open up a can of worms. Even the LEO's carry a card with Miranda on it so they get it right. If you tell the police you Miranaize him you've caused a problem.

It's more then you have the right to remain silent

[paul]

OOOH, I nust have looked at the title of this thread 10 times before I figured out what was bothering me:

Must civilian read someone their miranda rights if they place them under arrest?

One of my biggest pet peeves is police officers who call the general public Civilians, all it is is a poor attempt at drawing a false division. Police officers are a civil authority, not a military one, and as such are civilians too. Coming from someone who was at one point definitely not a civilian, this always rubbed me the wrong way. Regardless of what the politicians say, the police are not at war with anybody.

[gunperson003]

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to use the word civilian, it was the wrong word. I was tired when writing the post. For all purposes, what I meant was to say "citizen".

[DaveM55]

In Pa a private citizen can make an arrest for a felony, but not for misdemeanors. Evidence found by a private citizen does not fall under the same rules as evidence found by a LEO.

[Jrod]

I was just thinking about miranda rights today so I was looking around. If a person were to subdue and arrest a person if they were indeed acting in a felony, would the person be required to read them their Miranda rights? i.e. creating a pair of zip cuffs and restraining the person in question.

Based upon some quick research, courts have held that the Miranda rule does not extend to private persons who make citizens arrests. Miranda is required before LEO custodial interrogation. In Miranda, the U.S. Supreme Court was careful to say that ‘By custodial interrogation, we mean questioning initiated by law enforcement officers * * *. Accordingly, there is no Miranda warning required of private security guards or where persons are acting in a private capacity and not as law enforcement officers. State v. Lombardo, 104 Ariz. 598, 457 P.2d 275.