The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Woods, 720 F.2d 1022 (9th Cir. 1983):
At oral argument it was suggested for the first time that if probable cause existed for the arrest of appellants prior to the questioning which occurred in the cocktail lounge, their statements were inadmissible under Miranda v. Arizona. Appellants contended that because the officers had focused their investigation on them, they were not seeking to confirm or dispel a suspicion of possible criminal activity, but were engaged in gathering corroborative evidence to enhance their chances of obtaining a conviction. Appellants also advanced the theory that permitting officers to continue questioning a suspect during a lawful temporary seizure of the person after probable cause for an arrest exists is an impermissible evasion of the requirements imposed by Miranda.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.