Commonwealth v. Martin

The question presented in this case is whether the failure to give Miranda warnings to a suspect in custody requires suppression of physical evidence derived from an unwarned statement he made in response to police interrogation. Prior to *214the recent decision of the United States Supreme Court in United States v. Patane, 542 U.S. 630 (2004) (Patane), the answer (at least in Massachusetts) would clearly have been “yes.” We have consistently held that statements obtained in violation of the principles laid down in Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), are not admissible in evidence…