Encounters with the criminal justice system are among the most unpleasant events a person will ever experience.  Although our system of justice starts with the presumption of innocence of one accused of a crime, much of the procedure appears otherwise.

Anything you say to a law enforcement officer in any conversation will be used against you and is considered an admission for evidence purposes.  An admission is an exception to the hearsay rule, which generally excludes from evidence statements made outside of court.  Any statements made by a criminal defendant, whether to officers, or any one else, are admissions and exempt from the hearsay rule.

Beware:  Although the Supreme Court case of Miranda v. Arizona, (See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966)) gives citizens certain rights, its application is technical. That case requires officers to announce to you the rights that are now well known to most Americans – to remain silent, to have an attorney present to help you with any questioning, and to have a lawyer appointed to represent you free of charge if you can’t afford to hire one. THESE RIGHTS ARE NOT IN EFFECT UNLESS YOU ARE ARRESTED. What is meant by “arrested” varies from setting to setting, but in general it means you are deprived of your freedom to leave the scene by an officer.  An officer must have probable cause to believe a crime has been, is, or is about to be committed to arrest an individual.  A well-founded suspicion that a crime may have been or is being committed may be sufficient for a brief detention or “Terry” stop, named after the Supreme Court case of Terry v.Ohio. (See, Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968))

So in those instances where a person is not technically arrested, he or she will not get the warnings, and everything that is said will be used, and maybe misconstrued against you.  If you are in an encounter with law enforcement, you should remember to be prudent about your statements in all instances but the most routine.

Evidence of a crime in addition to incriminating statements are subject to suppression by the court if officers have not followed procedures required by our constitution.   Often, suppression of evidence will lead to dismissal of charges when the actual evidence is  necessary to prove a crime, as in a drug possession case.

In some cases the proof against one accused of a crime is so overwhelming that the only service an attorney can perform is to minimize the consequences of a conviction.  This in itself may be a tremendous advantage.

In others, where one is falsely accused, no matter the degree of proof, it is our office’s mission to explore all possible avenues of defense from the outset of a prosecution all the way through jury trial and appeal when indicated.  We represent accused individuals in all levels of offenses, from misdemeanors to class “A” felonies, and have been doing so successfully since 1982.