Public Safety Exception Case Study

Under the public safety exception, where officers engage in a custodial interrogation before Miranda warnings, and if reasonably prompted by a concern for the public safety or the safety of the arresting officers, a suspect’s statements are admissible as evidence. (New York v. Quarles (1984) 476 U.S. 656 (holding that the need for answers to questions in a situation posing a threat to the public safety outweighs the need for the prophylactic rule protecting the Fifth Amendment’s privilege against self-incrimination).) In essence, an officer must have a reasonable need to protect the public or themselves from immediate danger. Id. Moreover, the applicability of the public safety exception is not dependent upon the subjective motivation of the questioning officer. …show more content…
Newton (2004) 369 F.3d 659; see Allen v. Roe (2002) 305 F.3d 1046 (where the objectively reasonable need be based on what the officer knew at the time of questioning); see also United States v. Jones (2001) 154 F.2d 617 (likewise, holding the public exception applicable where police knew the suspect had a firearm in the apartment unattended with children present). In determining the objectively reasonable need, courts consider whether the defendant might have or recently have had a weapon and that someone other than the police might gain access to that weapon and inflict harm. (United States v. Williams (2007) 483 F.3d 425.) Accordingly, Miranda warnings are not required where there’s an objectively reasonable need in protecting the police or public from immediate danger and statements stemming from custodial interrogation must not be