Page 75 - Juvenile Practice is not Child's Play

Here, not only did the officer fail to advise F.L. of his Miranda rights, but the officer also clearly sought to obtain
incriminating statements from F.L. through coercive tactics and inappropriate behavior. While inside the principal’s
office, the officer pressured F.L. to speak by telling him that he needed to tell what he knew to avoid less trouble.

All alleged statements made by F.L., both in response to the officer’s pressure and in response to the girlfriend’s
statements following the officer’s actions, were made as a result of custodial interrogation without a waiver of his
rights as required by Miranda. As such, any and all unwarned statements given must be suppressed as the product of a

Fifth Amendment violation.

IX.

Unnecessary Delay

Respondent was not immediately taken before a magistrate and given a warning of his constitutional and
statutory rights as guaranteed by the United States Constitution, the Code of Criminal Procedure of the State of Texas
and the Family Code of the State of Texas. See Contreras v. State, 998 S.W.2d 656 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1999), rev’d by

67 S.W.3d 181 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (holding a delay of 50 minutes in bringing respondent to a juvenile processing
center was unnecessary where police were interviewing witnesses and attending to the victim of the offense).