Vague Reference to Miranda Warnings Insufficient – State v. Elwiski

Yesterday’s Appellate Division decision in State v. Elwiski provides an excellent review of the current state of the law regarding Miranda issues. In this case, the court was not satisfied that vague testimonial statements from a police officer such as “I read him his rights” or “I advised him of his rights” were sufficient as a matter of law to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had made a knowing and intelligent waiver of the right to remain silent.

This case also explores the public safety exception to Miranda as utilized in New Jersey.

This decision may not be the last word on the issues in this matter. It should be noted that there is a dissent in the case. Accordingly, the defendant is entitled to an appeal as of right to the Supreme Court.

Click here to download a copy of State v. Elwiski.

Category: Muni-Mail Archive