Arrest, Search, Seizure, Warrant criminal mistjuff

[arthurrig]

my son got caught (iledgidly) taging a street sign they arrestted him with out giving him writes and also they said they have a warrent which i never seen .they brought him down to the police station . since we said garrett do not say any thing until we see a lawyer. they got pist and set bail for 1550.00 @10 oclock @ night i had to get a bail bondsmen . next they put his name in the paper already convicting him of the crime with out going to court. he is 17.isany of this leagle or illeagle thank you.

 

[CdwJava]

my son got caught (iledgidly) taging a street sign they arrestted him with out giving him writes

Miranda rights are only required when a person is in custody and being interrogated (questioned) about the crime. They are not required merely because a person is arrested. Some 9 out of 10 offenses do not every necessitate Miranda.

and also they said they have a warrent which i never seen

That's pretty nifty if they got a warrant at the same time they arrested him. Or, did they arrest him some time AFTER he got caught by someone doing the tagging (allegedly).

All that is required for an arrest is sufficient probable cause to believe a crime was committed and that the person arrested committed the crime. if the time between the crime and the identification of the suspect is sufficiently great, then a warrant will be required. if the arrest is an issue, the state should have to present it as part of discovery to your son's attorney.

next they put his name in the paper already convicting him of the crime with out going to court. he is 17.isany of this leagle or illeagle thank you.

Unless your un-named state prohibits the release of the names of arrested 17 year olds to the paper, then no problem. If it was not lawful to release the name, then you can consult a civil attorney and see if you can sue them for whatever damages you feel your son has suffered as a result.

- Carl

 

[jacksgal]

Putting his name in paper is not a conviction. If that was the case OJ would have been guilty of murder years ago!:dgrin