Miranda warnings refer to a set of legal warnings that law enforcement officers are required to give to a suspect before conducting a custodial interrogation. These warnings are named after the landmark Supreme Court case Miranda v. Arizona (1966), in which the Court established the requirement that suspects be informed of their rights before being questioned while in police custody.

The Miranda warnings consist of four basic warnings:

The right to remain silent
The warning that anything said can and will be used against the suspect in a court of law
The right to an attorney
The warning that if the suspect cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for them by the government.

The purpose of the Miranda warnings is to ensure that suspects are aware of their constitutional rights, particularly their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and their Sixth Amendment right to counsel. The warnings are intended to help ensure that any statements made by the suspect during custodial interrogation are made voluntarily and are not the result of coercion or duress.

In the Miranda case, the Supreme Court held that the warnings must be given to suspects before custodial interrogation begins. The Court defined custodial interrogation as any questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of their freedom in any significant way.

If the Miranda warnings are not given to a suspect in custody before questioning, any statements made by the suspect may be suppressed as a violation of the suspect’s constitutional rights. This means that the statements cannot be used as evidence against the suspect in court.

It is important to note, however, that the Miranda warnings do not need to be given in every situation. The warnings are only required when a person is in custody and is being subjected to interrogation. If a person is not in custody or is not being interrogated, the Miranda warnings are not necessary.

The failure to give Miranda warnings does not automatically mean that any statements made by the suspect will be suppressed. In order for statements to be suppressed, the suspect must demonstrate that they were subjected to a custodial interrogation and that they were not informed of their Miranda rights. If the suspect was not in custody or was not subject to interrogation, then the Miranda warnings would not be required, and any statements made by the suspect could be used against them in court.

In some cases, even if a suspect’s statements are suppressed, there may still be other evidence that can be used against them at trial. For example, if the police obtained physical evidence or witness statements that link the suspect to the crime, that evidence may still be admissible at trial, even if the suspect’s statements are excluded.

If you believe that your Miranda rights were not read to you, contact a criminal defense attorney immediately. Your attorney can review the facts of your case and advise you on the best course of action. In some cases, it may be possible to have evidence suppressed or to negotiate a plea bargain.