ard. Therefore, since Al was in custody and being interrogated, Ann should given him Miranda warnings, so his statement to her is inadmissible.
The prosecutor will counter that the statement should be admitted against Al because of the public safety exception to Miranda, pursuant to the Court's decision in New York v. Quarles (1984). The prosecutor will argue that the police officer did not ask the question to elicit incriminating statements from Al, but instead asked so that she could secure the safety of herself, her partner, and the public. At the point of tackling Al, Ann only knew that Al was a lookout. Al could have had many well-armed confederates nearby, accomplices that posed a danger to Ann and Ace. Al could have thrown a gun into the bushes.
This is a close call, but the state likely will prevail. When she tackled Al, Ann still was trying to assess the situation. Al had already incriminated himself. Now Ann needed to determine what his statement meant and assess the danger. Were more police needed? Could
...