When is a Miranda Waiver Knowing, Intelligent & Voluntary in Florida?

March 31, 2025 Don Pumphrey, Jr. Criminal Defense Social Share

Imagine a suspect is arrested by law enforcement. They are told of their right to remain silent. However, the arresting officers omit that the suspect has the right to have an attorney during questioning. When officers begin the interrogation, the suspect initially remains quiet, but finally confesses. That confession is inadmissible in court. This blog will explore when someone has knowingly, intelligent, and voluntarily waived their Miranda rights – and when they have not.

The U.S. Supreme Court held in Miranda v. Arizona that suspects must be apprised of their Fifth Amendment rights at the time of their arrest. This includes the right to remain silent in the face of police questioning, and the right to have an attorney present while that questioning occurs. If their Miranda waiver is valid, anything that person says can and will be used against them in court. Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 479 (1966); Martinez-Godez v. State, 225 So.3d 926 (Fla 1st DCA 2017). 

When someone waives their Miranda rights, they must do so knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily. The Miranda court noted that someone can technically “waive” their rights and confess to a crime under certain circumstances, but this confession would still be inadmissible at trial. For a waiver to be legitimate, it must be the product of a “free and deliberate choice,” rather than the result of coercion or deception. State v. Herrera, 201 So.3d 192 (Fla 2nd DCA 2016)

Someone’s decision to waive their Miranda rights must be made with a full awareness of both the nature of the right being abandoned and the consequences of the decision to abandon it. M.A.B. v. State, 957 So.2d 1219 (Fla 2nd DCA 2007). Officers must not mislead suspects about the nature of their rights, such as only reading portions of the Miranda warning, or dishonestly answering a suspect’s question about their rights if they do not yet understand them.

Evidence of police intimidation, cajoling, or trickery in an effort to get a suspect to waive their Miranda rights invalidates any subsequent waiver. Dooley v. State, 743 So.2d 65, 68 (Fla 4th DCA 1999). Officers cannot threaten someone with punishment if they exercise their rights, or mislead them as to when they are allowed to invoke them. 

Any misstatements or withholding of information by police that affect someone’s ability to understand the nature of the rights and the consequences of waiving them, render the waiver invalid. State v. Pitts, 936 So.2d 1111, 1132 (Fla 2nd DCA 2006). Additionally, police cannot deliberately elicit a confession from someone before reading their Miranda rights, to make it easier to elicit a second, post-Miranda confession. Missouri v. Seibert, 542 U.S. 600 (2004). If this is done, neither confession is considered admissible.

When evaluating whether a waiver was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, courts in Florida consider various factors. State v. Crosby, 599 So.2d 138, 142 (Fla 5th DCA 1992). These include a suspect’s:

• Age, experience and background
• Intelligence and general mental capacity
• Physical condition (Mincey v. Arizona, 437 U.S. 385 (1978))
• Demeanor, coherence, and articulateness
• Memory, level of education, and level of reading skill

Mincey held that a suspect under the influence of heavy medication immediately after surgery did not make a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver. But this does not mean a person under the influence of drugs cannot waive their Miranda rights. The validity of a waiver depends on the suspect’s mental impairment at the time, not the mere presence of drugs in their system. Burns v. State, 584 So. 2d 1073 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Frazier v. State, 107 So. 3d 285 (Fla. 2012).

A lack of experience with the criminal justice system weighs in someone’s favor when arguing their Miranda waiver was not knowing, intelligent, and voluntary. J.H. v. State, 344 So.3d 616, 620 (Fla 1st DCA 2022). This is particularly true of juveniles. Courts are generally more likely to find a juvenile’s Miranda waiver involuntary than an adult’s. But this depends on several factors, which include:

• Age: Younger juveniles are generally assumed to be less likely to understand the waiver
• Level of experience in the criminal justice system: If the juvenile has been arrested and interrogated multiple times, courts are more likely to hold their waiver was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary
• Education and intelligence
• Physical condition 
• Presence of a parent: If a parent forces their child to sign the Miranda waiver, this could invalidate the waiver, as it was not voluntary. By contrast, if a parent helps explain the waiver in simpler terms to the child so they understand it, the court may be more likely to uphold the waiver.

The validity of any Miranda waiver – whether it is made by juvenile or adult – is determined by assessing the totality of the circumstances. Ross v. State, 45 So.3d 403, 415 (Fla. 2010). If a court finds the Miranda waiver was not knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, any statements made by the suspect during the subsequent interrogation are inadmissible in a court of law. This includes a confession.

If someone is concerned that their Miranda waiver was not knowing, intelligent and voluntary, it is crucial to find experienced and aggressive legal representation as soon as possible. This vital decision could make the difference in whether or not a person is subject to a lengthy prison term and hefty fines. 

Don Pumphrey Jr. and the attorneys at Pumphrey Law have decades of experience fighting to win for clients across the state of Florida. Call now at (850) 681-7777 for a free consultation.

Former Prosecutor, Former State Police Officer, Lifetime Member of the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers; for over 25 years as a private defense attorney who is Trusted, Experienced, Aggressive in Criminal Defense as a Trial Attorney, Criminal Lawyer, Criminal Defense Lawyer for the accused in Florida State Courts located in Tallahassee, Florida but handling cases throughout the State of Florida.

Don Pumphrey, Jr. and the experienced, Tallahassee criminal defense attorneys at Pumphrey Law have decades of experience fighting on behalf of clients and winning. Call Pumphrey Law now at (850) 681-7777 to learn more about what we can do for you. Our lawyers will be happy to provide you with a free consultation.

  Social Share