I am a 50 y.o. disabled woman who was charged with theft <50>500 and arrested. I had not left the building and actually had stopped before departing the last door to the outside and was planning on taking everything back. I am bipolar and at times impulsive w/little control even while taking meds. I was told by the Judge at arraignment at the jail before bond was set that my rights only had to be read in custodial cases. I thought when you were arrested for any reason you had to be mirandized. Am I wrong in thinking they should have waited to detain me until I actually exited the door and the police officer should have mirandized me?

Am I wrong in thinking they should have waited to detain me until I actually exited the door and the police officer should have mirandized me?Hello funny:

They don't have to mirandize you unless they wish to conduct an interrogation. They MIGHT have to wait until you depart the store, however, before they arrest you.

I'd hire me a damn good lawyer.

excon

I think once you walked through the first set of doors and into the vestibule, you were considered to be stealing.

90&#37; of the people I've talked to "intended to take everything back."

Who stopped you? Store security and then they called the Police? The Police?

Store security does NOT have to read Miranda to you and perhaps you "confessed" to them - ?

Excon and Judy, thank you for your replies. And yes, Judy, "everyone" in jail or prison is "innocent", but there are times when you really do intend to do the right thing... no excuse, just saying. Again, thanks.

excon and Judy, thank you for your replies. And yes, Judy, "everyone" in jail or prison is "innocent", but there are times when you really do intend to do the right thing....no excuse, just saying. Again, thanks.


No problem - I would be honest with the Judge and see how it works out for you.

Please come back and let us know.

I was in retail security for thirteen years and while I agree with all the above, let's clarify a few things. First of all, while stores want to deter shoplifting by arresting those who rip them off, they are extremely concerned about false arrest suits and therefore normally have a policy that requires them to detain only those who have left the store.

However, what the law is and what the store policy is are two different things. In my state (MD) the statute required only "asportation or concealment with the intent to deprive." Asportation means movement, if the person leaves the store without paying, they don't have to conceal the merchandise, their intent is obvious by their movements. However, if they conceal items on their person or in a bag of some kind, they can be arrested on the spot if they have demonstrated an intent to deprive [the owner of the use of his merchandise], such as removing the tags or wearing the clothing under their own clothing.

In other words, it depends on the laws of your state and I hope you get a lawyer to explain all this to you. First offenders are most likely to get probation, community service or some non-jail sanction if convicted.

I just answered in another post the question of the Miranda rights and the need to advise an arrested person. There is no need to do so, however if you were not advised, nothing you say (or write down) can be used against you in court as a general rule.

While it is generally correct to say that store security personnel are not required to administer the Miranda warnings because they are not police officers, I had a special police commission issued by the Maryland State Police which gave me the powers and responsibilities of a police officer on the premises where I worked, even though I worked for a private firm. If I wanted to use a statement in court, I had to give the Miranda warnings and was also empowered to charge people with resisting arrest and assaulting a police officer when appropriate.