COA - AKM - Right against self-incrimination during school questioning

A.K.M. v. Commonwealth, 212-CA-1190 (not yet final)(not to be published): 

AKM was interrogated twice while at school regarding an alleged theft of $20-$40 from the teacher’s lounge.  The first interrogation was conducted by the school principal while an officer, who was at the school initially on an unrelated matter, was in the next room. After AKM admitted to taking the money to the Principal, he was brought to the police officer who informed him of his Miranda rights and questioned him again, yielding a second confession. During the second interrogation AKM repeatedly stated that he did not want to tell on himself.  

The Appellant raised several issues on appeal, including that the first interrogation violated Miranda under N.C. and Welch because the purpose of the questioning was to gather evidence for a criminal prosecution, that the second confession was tainted and coerced, and that the Appellant asserted his right to remain silent during the second interrogation.  The Court of Appeals found that Miranda warnings were not necessary for the first interrogation because, distinguishing from N.C., the principal was “acting only as a principal investigating a school disciplinary matter” and there was no evidence that the principal was acting in concert with the police officers.  As to the second interrogation, the Court found that AKM was in custody at the time of the police interrogation and had invoked his right to remain silent by stating, “I don’t want to tell on myself” and that continued questioning violated the 5^th amendment.  The Court found this statement to be a clear articulation of the desire to remain silent and reversed.  Judge Thompson wrote the opinion with Dixon concurring and Caperton dissented (no written dissenting opinion).

Contributed by Renee VandenWallBake

Kentucky Supreme Court considering Miranda warning for students- Louisville Courier Journal

The Kentucky Supreme Court is considering a case from Nelson County that could require school officials to give the Miranda warning — you have the right to remain silent and anything you say can and will be used against you — when questioning a student with a school resource officer present.

Principals frequently work in concert with such officers — there are 254 sworn police working in Kentucky schools, according to the Kentucky Center for School Safety, and up to 60 percent of schools nationwide have one on campus.

Miranda warnings are required when a subject is in custody — when a suspect thinks he’s not free to leave — and at issue is whether a student grilled in the principal’s inherently fits that description.

Opponents of requiring the warnings in school say administrators have more important things to do.

more....

National Juvenile Justice Network - Safe and Effective School Disciplinary Policies and Practices

NJJN Policy Platform - Safe and Effective School Disciplinary Policies and Practices

NJJN's latest policy platform includes recommendations on safe and effective school disciplinary policies and practices.  The recommendations focus on:

Law enforcement and discipline policies
Suspensions and expulsions
Student rights and family engagement
Students with disabilities
Data and racial and ethnic disparities (Disproportionate Minority Contact

Click here to see all NJJN policy platforms.

Law Enforcement and Discipline Policies

• Schools must reject the one-size-fits-all prearranged set of sanctions laid out in zero tolerance policies and instead promote discipline policies that provide individualized assessments and interventions that are appropriate to ensure a safe learning environment.
• Schools must not use law enforcement as a response to non-criminal adolescent misbehavior. If students engage in criminal behavior on school grounds, schools must have graduated responses in place, reserving law enforcement for only the most serious offenses.
• Schools must establish clear guidelines for school personnel and on-campus law enforcement officials
  regarding the role of each in responding to youth behaviors and exactly which infractions may lead to court
  referrals. Referrals to court should be reserved for only the most serious infractions.
• To eliminate or curtail the use of mechanical restraints, chemical restraints, corporal punishment, and isolation, law enforcement and school officials must be trained on the traumatic effects of these practices, as well as child and adolescent development, appropriate methods for de-escalation, and safe and effective responses to youth behaviors.
• Schools must focus on prevention and effective intervention as responses to disciplinary issues. Positive
  Behavioral Interventions and Supports, peer juries, restorative justice processes, diversion, mentoring, mental health counseling, and restitution can be particularly effective in improving school safety and promoting positive youth development.