Suppose you are an Arizona officer with a snitch who is willing to help bring down an organized crime grou

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

Federal law and many state wiretapping statutes permit recording if one party (including you) to the phone call or conversation consents. A few states require that all parties to the communication consent. Unfortunately, it is not always easy to tell which law applies to a communication, especially a phone call. For example, if you and the person you are recording are in different states, then it is difficult to say in advance whether federal or state law applies, and, if state law applies, which of the two (or more) relevant state laws will control the situation. Therefore, if you record a phone call with participants in more than one state, it is best to play it safe and get the consent of all parties. However, when you and the person you are recording are both located in the same state, then you can rely with greater certainty on the law of that state. In some states, this will mean that you can record with the consent of one party to the communication. In others, you will still need to get everyone's consent.

Arizona's wiretapping law is a "one-party consent" law. Arizona makes it a crime to intercept a "wire or electronic communication" or a "conversation or discussion" unless you are a party to the communication, present during the conversation or discussion, or one party to the communication or conversation consents. Therefore, if you operate in Arizona, you may record a conversation or phone call if you are a party to the conversation or you get permission from one party to the conversation in advance.

Miranda warnings are a list of warnings that the officer must advise, either in writing or verbally, to a person in custody, before questioning. Miranda warnings in a scenario such as this would not apply. The United States Supreme Court in the case of Miranda v. Arizona established an irrefutable presumption that a statement is involuntary if made during a custodial interrogation without the Miranda warnings being given. Basically, this means that if a person is in custody and interrogated without being given the warnings, everything the person says will likely be inadmissible in court. There is no difference in the application of the Miranda warnings when the crime is either a misdemeanor or felony. In our given scenario, the suspect was not under arrest, so there is no requirement to advise him of his rights.