SCOTUS Case: Howes v. Fields

Johniera McClain

American Government

B band

10/13/11

                                    SCOTUS Case: Howes v. Fields

Suspects are entitled to Miranda Warnings when they are being questioned about a crime while they are in custody. Was Randall Fields indeed custody when it was not clear that the police officer gave out an Miranda Warning to Fields?

            The Miranda Rights refer to the some of the rights that are contained in the Fifth Amendment in the Constitution. As in The Fifth Amendment it states: “Miranda v. Arizona (1966) was a landmark US Supreme Court case. Ernesto Miranda had signed a statement confessing to a crime, but he did not know he had an absolute right to remain silent and not talk to the police, as guaranteed to him by the Constitution, and the police did not inform him of his constitutional right before asking him questions and then having him sign a written confession. His conviction was based entirely on the confession he signed, and not on any independent evidence in the state's possession.”

            Fields convicted of several accounts of sexual behavior with a minor that had been affirmed by the Michigan Court of Appeals, which upheld the admission of the defendant's’ self incriminating statements that was told to the police officers at the prison while he was serving time for another reason.

            The Sixth Circuit affirmed a districts court’s grant of federal habeas relief on the ground that Fields was in custody when in questioned and that the statements that were said should have been suppressed due to the failure of the officer complying with the Miranda before interrogating Fields.

 
            People on the behalf of the Petitioner Ms. Carol Howes questioned why a prisoner who was mandated to leave his cell to go to another building to answer questions about another crime should not be considered in custody.

            Personal belief, is that the petitioner of the case will be what is going to come out of this. Randall Fields was incarcerated at the time due to unrelated reasoning of the circumstance in which he was questioned. Although, why wouldn’t Fields think that he was under the Miranda Custody due to the fact that he was already in the presence of a police officer questioning him? It could go somewhere else though because according to Fields he was under the impression that he was allowed to leave if and when he so chooses and also he was properly given his Miranda warning when by Constitution and particular the Fifth Amendment he was lawfully by right had to have that given to him. It shall be interesting as it all unfolds.