View Single Post
Old 05-25-2004, 19:59   #8
Airbornelawyer
Moderator
 
Airbornelawyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,938
Quote:
Originally posted by The Reaper
My reference to the mix was Miranda and Article 31 rights. My understanding was that Miranda was civil law and Article 31 was military law.
Miranda is constitutional law. There is no federal civil law (and no state civil law outside of Louisiana).

The hierarchy of Federal law, both civilian and military, is (i) U.S. Constitution, (ii) statutes and treaties, and (iii) rules and regulations. The UCMJ is a statute - Chapter 47 of Title 10 of the U.S. Code - and like all Federal laws is subject to the Constitution. So Article 31(b), for example, may be broader than what the Constitution allows, but it cannot be narrower. If there were a conflict between Miranda and Article 31, Miranda would win. And if Congress repealed Article 31 tomorrow, suspects undergoing custodial interrogation would still have to be read their rights. They just would lose the right to remain silent in non-custodial situations that they have now under Article 31.

Regarding something you said earlier, most people probably do know their rights, they just don't know when they attach. I grew up watching Adam-12 (and my bicycle was 1 Adam 12 when it wasn't 7 Mary 3), so I used to think cops had to give the Miranda warnings as soon as they arrested you.
Airbornelawyer is offline   Reply With Quote