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

[gunperson003]

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.

[Statkowski]

No lawful requirement. Actually, best to not ask questions until the police eventually show up. Anything you say he said might be hearsay and inadmissable anyway.

[TaePo]

I am at work so am blocked from the laws.

But, IIRC, the law states you can detain (and use force if necessary such as handcuffs etc.) until you can safely release custody when the police arrive.

It is referenced in two sections I believe. Once for detaining and once for detaining with force.

Other, more detailed replies will be forthcoming by the others.

(ETA: You are a witness not a representative of government, so no mirandizing. Best to just hold until you can release.)

[Evolution]

I doubt it. It isn't your job to question the suspect. That is for law enforcement. Your job is to just detain him until the police come and actually take him into custody. OMO

[paul]

I was under the impression that police don't need to mirandize anymore... maybe someone could inform me otherwise?

[knight0334]

This is just advice coming from another "Joe" - NOT a lawyer or LEO:


If you detain/arrest someone - make sure absolutely you can prove that they were committing or committed the crime. If you are able to do so there will be absolutely NO reason to question them. Your duty/power isn't to investigate whether the crime took place, but only to arrest when one actually took place.

When I took my armed guard classes in FL, we were instructed to even tell the suspect to "shut up" for their own good. As a guard, we only had the common law powers of arrest just like any citizen - posse comitatus and Hue & Cry.

I believe PA honors the arrest power thing like the common law practice(posse comitatus), which is the following manners:

1. For misdemeanors - you bear witness to the crime first hand at minimum.
2. For felonies - you only have to have "reason to believe" a felony took place or is taking place. In reality you better have proof, evidence and people to swear they saw the crime take place.

[gunperson003]

Hmm, thanks. I'll look further in to it. What instigated my question was the guy who stopped the bank robber who supposedly had a bomb. I'll read more in to the books and such to verify. I always carry zip ties with me, among other things just to always be ready. They're thin and light, so why not carry zip ties?

This is just advice coming from another "Joe" - NOT a lawyer or LEO:


If you detain/arrest someone - make sure absolutely you can prove that they were committing or committed the crime. If you are able to do so there will be absolutely NO reason to question them. Your duty/power isn't to investigate whether the crime took place, but only to arrest when one actually took place.

When I took my armed guard classes in FL, we were instructed to even tell the suspect to "shut up" for their own good. As a guard, we only had the common law powers of arrest just like any citizen - posse comitatus and Hue & Cry.

I believe PA honors the arrest power thing like the common law practice(posse comitatus), which is the following manners:

1. For misdemeanors - you bear witness to the crime first hand at minimum.
2. For felonies - you only have to have "reason to believe" a felony took place or is taking place. In reality you better have proof, evidence and people to swear they saw the crime take place.

[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.