Chicago Police DepartmentGeneral Order G04-03
Custodial Interrogations
Issue Date:31 December 2015Effective Date:01 January 2016
Rescinds:G04-03 Interrogations: Field and Custodial 03 April 2014 Version
Index Category:Preliminary Investigations
This directive:
  • A.continues the procedures relative to custodial interrogations and advising individuals of their rights afforded by the United States Supreme Court decision in:
    • 1.Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966)
    • 2. Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420 (1984)
    • 3.Maryland v. Shatzer, 130 S.CT 1213 (2010)
    • 4.Berghuis v. Thompkins, 560 U.S. (2010).
  • B.satisfies CALEA Law Enforcement Standards in Chapter 1.
II.Advising The Individual Of Their Rights
  • A.Before the interrogation of an individual who is in custody, including in the field, regardless of the offense, the sworn investigating member will, in the presence of another sworn Department member if possible, expressly warn the individual of their constitutional rights by orally reciting each of the warnings and obtaining a response for each warning.
  • B.Warning of the individual’s rights must be given before the commencement of any in-custody interrogation about a specific crime or offense for which the individual is in custody.
    Pursuant to Berkemer v. McCarty, Miranda applies to misdemeanors as well as felonies, but only if there is an in-custody interrogation. Routine traffic stops do not require that Miranda be given before asking questions related to the traffic stop.
  • C.Before accepting any admission or statement of a juvenile, the juvenile will be advised that their case may be transferred to criminal court where they will be prosecuted as an adult. A JUVENILE SHOULD BE WARNED AND QUESTIONED ONLY IN THE PRESENCE OF AN ADULT. Before proceeding with the interrogation of a juvenile, members will refer to the Department directive entitled “Processing of Juveniles and Minors Under Department Control.”
  • D.Members are advised that a failure to follow Department policy and procedures regarding Miranda or promises/suggestions of benefits to the subject may result in the confession being excluded at trial.
  • E.If the individual:
    • 1.requests advice as to whether or not they should decide to answer questions, Department members are not permitted to advise the individual.
    • 2.has Limited English Proficiency, the investigating member will request and use only Department-authorized interpreters or translators as delineated in the Department directive entitled “Limited English Proficiency.”
    • 3.states they do not wish to answer questions and remains silent, the investigating member will document that the individual invoked their right to remain silent in the appropriate report.
    • 4.initiates communication with the investigating member or wishes to answer questions after invoking their right to remain silent or their right to have an attorney present, the investigating member will document the circumstances on the appropriate report.
III.Waiver of Rights
  • A.An individual may waive these rights, provided the waiver is made voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently.
  • B.An express statement by the individual, after hearing the warnings, that they are willing to make a statement and that they do not want a lawyer, constitutes a waiver. The investigating member will document, in the appropriate report, the conditions and the circumstances in which an express statement was given by the individual.
  • C.Pursuant to Berghuis v. Thompkins, 560 U.S. (2010), an individual who is aware of their right to remain silent must unambiguously invoke that right. If the individual does not explicitly invoke their right to remain silent, the interrogation may continue and any subsequent voluntary statements may be used in court.
  • D.If an individual orally waives their rights, the investigating member will document the oral waiver of rights in the appropriate report.
  • E.Any indication that the individual was threatened or coerced into a waiver of these rights will establish that the waiver was not voluntary.
IV.Interrogation Procedure
  • A.Warning of the individual’s rights must be given before the commencement of any in-custody interrogation about a specific crime or offense for which the individual is in custody.
  • B.Members interrogating juveniles will follow procedures consistent with the Department directive entitled “Processing of Juveniles and Minors Under Department Control.”
  • C.An individual who wishes to consult a lawyer will not be interrogated until they have an opportunity to do so.
  • D.The individual will be informed if a lawyer appears at any time (or a parent appears in cases involving a juvenile) and requests to see the subject, regardless of the fact that the subject had previously waived their right to have an attorney present. In addition, the person to be questioned will have an opportunity to have the lawyer or parent present during any subsequent questioning, if they so desire.
    Department members will follow the procedures in the directive entitled "Arrestee and In-Custody Communications."
  • E.If the person to be questioned:
    • 1.states that they understand the meaning of the warnings and that they nonetheless wish to answer questions without speaking to a lawyer and without having a lawyer present, and later changes their mind, the questioning will immediately cease.
    • 2.refuses to answer questions, and later changes their mind, officers must take care to show that this change of mind was initiated by the person to be questioned, that it was made voluntarily and intelligently, and that the rights were given again.
V.Subsequent Interrogations – Time Period Limitation
  • A.Pursuant to Maryland v. Shatzer, if an individual who has asserted their 5th Amendment right to an attorney before answering questions is released from Department custody prior to being charged with the offense for which they have asserted their rights, members may attempt to question the individual about this offense after a period of fourteen days has expired.
    The fourteen-day period begins upon release of the subject from custody.
  • B.Police may also resume questioning if the subject is incarcerated in another facility, as long as they have not been charged/convicted with the offense for which they originally asserted their rights following Miranda.
VI.When Warnings Are Not Required
  • A.The warnings need not be given to any person who spontaneously volunteers information without any questioning by anyone.
  • B.There is no requirement that the police stop and warn a person who enters a police facility and states that they wish to confess a crime, nor that they stop and warn a person who telephones the police or approaches any police officer on duty to offer a confession or any statement about said crime and their part in it.
  • C.A person need not be advised of their rights if the police are engaged in general on-the-scene questioning about a crime or other general questioning of witnesses in the fact-finding process, as long as the questioned person has not been taken into custody or has not become the focus of the investigation. Such a person can leave the scene at any time they so desire.
  • D.Warnings need not be given on the scene immediately to a person in custody when the urgency of a situation poses a threat to the public safety or the safety of the officer. However, any further questions designed solely to elicit testimonial evidence from the person in custody must be preceded by the Miranda warnings.
(Items indicated by italics/double underline were added or revised.)
John J. Escalante
Interim Superintendent of Police
15-080 CMF
1. -
  • Has been interpreted by the United States Supreme Court as "questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or has otherwise been deprived of his freedom of action by the authorities in any significant way."
  • An interrogation in which a reasonable person would consider themselves in custody and the questions asked during the interrogation are reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response.
    Interrogation encompasses not only questioning, but also any remarks, psychological tactics or patent maneuvering designed to elicit a response or to undermine a subject's will to resist further questioning.