The failure of police to advise the defendant of the charges against him will result in a suppression of his statement despite Miranda State v Sims 466 N.J. Super. 346 (N.J. Super. 2021)
Having considered defendant's contentions in light of the record and the applicable principles of law, the court reverses the denial of his motion to suppress his statement because defendant was not properly advised of the status of the charges against him prior to his interrogation.
In this appeal, the court determined as a matter of first impression that the Supreme Court's holdings in State v. A.G.D., 178 N.J. 56 (2003), and in State v. Vincenty 237 N.J. 122 (2019), requiring that police inform a defendant subject to custodial interrogation of specific charges filed against him before he can waive his in Miranda rights, also applies to an interrogee who was arrested and questioned prior to any charges being filed, where the arrest was based upon information developed through an earlier police investigation.
