Brown Law Office Criminal Defense News

In a landmark case that alters the standard that Ohio courts apply in criminal cases when determining if a suspect is in custody for purposes of Miranda warnings, the Ohio Supreme Court held that the test is not whether that a reasonable person would have felt free to leave; the test is whether a reasonable person would have understood that he or she was in custody.  In Cleveland v. Oles, 2017-Ohio-5834, the defendant was placed in the front seat of a police cruiser during a traffic stop and interrogated.  The question before the Court was whether placing an individual in the front seat of a police cruiser for questioning constituted custodial interrogation for purposes of Miranda v. Arizona.  That Court held that it did not, because the intrusion by the officer was minimal.  A link to the decision can be found here.

This decision provides guidance to Ohio criminal attorneys on what constitutes “custody” for purposes of Miranda warnings.  Contact the criminal attorneys at the Brown Law Office today at 330-601-0101 for a free consultation.