New York v.

New York v. Quarles
Supreme Court of United States (1984)

Respondent/Defendant: Quarles; a woman approached two officers and told them that she was raped by a black guy who was about six feet tall, wearing a black jacket with words "Big Ben" wirtten on the back, and she also told the officers that the man had just walked into a food market. The officers spotted the man in the market and after seeing the officers, the man ran to the back of the market. The officer arrested the man and they found an empty shoulder holster on the man and they asked him where the gun was and the man pointed to the back of some boxes, where the gun was found. The trial court suppressed the gun and the statement made by the defendant because, the court ruled, the defendant was under arrest and he was not read his Miranda rights before the police questioned him about the gun. The New York Court of Appeals affirmed trial court's ruling.

Issue: Can the gun and the statement be admitted as evidence if they were obtained under the given circumstances?

Holding: Yes

Legal Reasoning: The court came up with the "public safety exception." The court ruled that under the given circumstances, the officers did not have the time to give the defendant his Miranda warnings. The court also stated that if the warnings were given, the defendant could have become reluctant to tell the police about the location of the gun. The court ruled that since the incident took place in a public market, the hidden gun created an emergency situation for the police officers and they did not have the time to read the defendant his Miranda warnings. So the court concluded that "the need for answers to questions in a situation posing a threat to the public safety outweighs the need for the prophylactic rule protecting the Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination." The ruling of the lower court was reversed.

BACK