Miranda rights and DUI Stops

During a DUI Stop, do Officers have to read Miranda Rights to Suspected Drunk Drivers?

If a driver is stopped for suspicion of DUI, their rights must be defended. The driver, in most cases, has the sole responsibility to protect these rights. Simply because an officer suspects a motorist is drunk and dangerous does not mean that an officer can violate a driver’s legal rights. On the other hand, an officer is justified in asking questions of the driver of the vehicle without first reading, what are commonly known as Miranda rights. At the heart of this issue is whether or not the officer was “interrogating” the motorist. The only time that an officer is obligated to read these rights is when the suspect has been arrested, and they will continue to be questioned by police. This amounts to interrogation. If the arrest occurs and the officer has no questions, there is no requirement that the Miranda warning be given. It does not matter if the officer reads Miranda or not. The operator of the vehicle does not have to answer the officer’s questions. Many times, when an individual does answer the questions, they incriminate themselves or indirectly encourage the police to believe they are under-the-influence.

Officers are often relying on a motorist’s anxiety and know that most drivers want to be cooperative and respectful. Drivers typically try to comply with the officer’s request even when they are not required to do so. If the officer does not read Miranda warning, arrests the driver, and continues to ask the individual questions, a DUI defense lawyer may request a motion to suppress evidence and statements. However, this is still contingent upon details of the stop, the questions asked, and the responses given. No two DUI stops are exactly the same but the issue of Miranda rights seems to consistently arise in such cases.

Refusing to answer the police, Sheriff or any Law Enforcement Officers’ questions may require a high degree of diplomacy and politeness on the part of the suspected drunk driver. Frustrating the officer with rude behavior is typically not a good idea. But citizens do have the right to legal counsel as soon as the stop is made and also have the right to remain, basically, silent.

Without reading Miranda rights, an officer can ask for a driver’s license, registration and insurance coverage information. The driver is legally obligated to produce these documents. This is not an interrogation nor is the driver in custody. Miranda rights are still incredibly important but the police do not have to read them unless they take the driver into custody and interrogate them. The officer may ask for biographical information even if that same information is included on the aforementioned documents: name, address, birthday, and other similar questions. The driver does not have to answer these. Police may be using these questions to uncover evidence of intoxication: slurred speech, stuttering, difficulty thinking of words, and other similar “evidence.”Though most attorneys will discourage answering any questions, a driver may answer those simple types of questions without disastrous consequences. There are certain questions, however, that a driver should absolutely never answer.

A driver should always politely decline to answer these questions: “Have you been drinking? How much have you been drinking?” Not answering such questions cannot imply guilt. Refusing to answer such questions is an important constitutional right. The vehicle operator can respectfully say “I have been told to never answer questions like that without an attorney present.” If the officer persists or uses such a refusal as an excuse to make an arrest, this may make life difficult in the short-term for the driver, an experienced attorney may use the officer’s actions for the benefit of their client in the long-term. The arrest is not a conviction. So even if a motorist is arrested and faces some immediate discomfort and inconvenience, what happens after the arrest is crucial for avoiding conviction. Often, a DUI arrest follows a roadside field sobriety test, but a driver does not necessarily have to comply with the requests. They can politely decline to participate in the test.

Drivers do not have to participate in such a roadside sobriety tests. Again, this refusal must be done tactfully but such a refusal is a constitutional right. The questions asked and field-sobriety tests are intended to elicit incriminating evidence so a motorist should say the bare minimum and do only what is legally required. If a driver is asked to step from their car, they must comply but the driver does not have to participate in the sobriety test. Since many of these tests are useless in determining sobriety, they are often used to provide additional information that would give the officer reason to believe the driver is intoxicated. Even sober people may fail such tests because of nervousness or physical difficulties unrelated to inebriation. The officer may look for stumbles or difficulties with balance. Such challenges can arise for a variety of reasons unrelated to alcohol or drug use. But any questionable speech or movement may give the officer enough reason to arrest the driver. A driver should only do and say the bare minimum when stopped for suspicion of DUI.

If a vehicle operator has been pulled over or stopped at a checkpoint, they are not in custody nor are they being formally interrogated. As a result, the officer does not need to read the driver’s Miranda rights before asking questions. If the officer does arrest a person, they must offer the Miranda warnings if they interrogate them. However, the same protections that get articulated in the Miranda warnings are still a citizen’s rights even before arrest and before the rights are announced: the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney.