Case Summaries: Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals – (Dec. 2020)

This post summarized published criminal and related decisions from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decided in December, 2020, that may be of interest to state practitioners. Miranda protections do not apply to supervised release proceedings U.S. v. Ka, 982 F.3d 219 (Dec. 2, 2020). In this case from the Western District of North Carolina, the defendant was serving a term of supervised release. The terms of release included a condition that the defendant answer questions of his probation officer truthfully. During a meeting with his probation officer, the defendant admitted to selling drugs in violation of other terms of his release. Those statements were used by the district court in finding the defendant in violation and revoking his release. He appealed, arguing that his statements were obtained in violation of Miranda protections. Although he did not invoke his right to remain silent during the interview with his probation officer, he claimed that the condition of his release requiring truthful answers brought his case within the “penalty exception,” where a defendant need not invoke Miranda if the invocation of the right will result in punishment. See Garner v. U.S., 424 U.S. 648 (1976). Under circuit precedent, protections from self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment do not apply to “ordinary” revocation proceedings. U.S. v. Riley, 920 F.3d 200, 207 (4th Cir. 2019). “[T]he clause is violated ‘only if [the self-incriminating] statements are used in a criminal trial.’ ‘Supervised release revocation proceedings, however, are not part of the underlying criminal prosecution.’” Slip op. at [...]