Note to Teachers: Use this chart to help students identify the factors that courts might take into consideration in each case to determine if someone is in custody and, therefore, should receive a Miranda warning.
| Answer Key
COA Cases #1 - #4 | United States v. Kim | United States v. Luna-Encinas | United States v. Romaszko | United States v. Thompson |
| Language Used to Summon the Individual | voluntarily went to store
separated from husband at door
told to “shut up” | serious tone of voice
in context of search
guns drawn | supervisor required attendance
mtg was during work hours at work | police identified themselves
asked & were invited
conversational approach |
| Confrontation with Evidence of Guilt | not known | yes | not known | showed sketch that matched him |
| Physical Surroundings/Location | in her own store
separated from husband
surrounded by officers | outside his own home | office of station manager | seated in his living room |
| Duration | 1+ to 3 hours | 20 minutes | not known | several hours |
| Degree of Pressure Applied (physical or otherwise) | isolated from husband and son
told not to speak Korean
she was seated, officers standing | police in backyard with guns
told to pull up shirts
told to sit and stay
told not to talk to each other | at least 5 times asked to leave or tried to stand
told “No, you’re not going anywhere.” | no apparent pressure |
| Other Factors | language barrier | Spanish-speaking officer on scene | anticipated job loss if didn’t cooperate | felt free to go jogging the next day |
| Totality of the Circumstances:
In Custody or Not? | In Custody | Not in Custody | In Custody | Not in Custody |
Answer Key for Courts of Appeals Decisions in U.S. v. Kim; U.S. v. Luna-Encinas; U.S. v. Romaszko; U.S. v. Thompson