Question

​Henry has been arrested for stealing a car belonging to the local highway department. He was found by the side of a local highway with a flat tire, trying to change the tire on the highway department car. He has been taken to the local police station, where he is waiting in the interrogation room for detectives to talk to him. If state law in the neighboring state requires that the interrogation be videotaped, what impact does that law have on this interrogation?

Answer 1

The videotaping law in a neighboring state does not impact Henry's interrogation unless it occurs in that state. Interrogation laws, such as recording requirements and Miranda Rights, are subject to state jurisdiction and constitutional protections.

Step-by-step explanation:

The law in the neighboring state requiring that an interrogation be videotaped has no impact on Henry's situation unless the interrogation is occurring within that state. Laws are not generally extraterritorial; they do not have force outside the jurisdiction in which they were enacted. Therefore, if Henry is being interrogated in a state that does not have such a videotaping law, the neighboring state's law would not apply.

Nonetheless, across the United States, there are established protocols for interrogating suspects to ensure that their rights are protected. For instance, the Miranda Rights—a staple in law enforcement—mandate that a suspect be informed of the right to remain silent, the potential for any statements to be used against them in court, and the right to an attorney before and during questioning. These rights stem from the Fifth Amendment's protection against self-incrimination and the Sixth Amendment's guarantee of assistance of counsel.

Answer 2

No impact.

Step-by-step explanation:

In some countries, states do not have the autonomy to formulate their own laws. The US is not one of those. In the state territory, although there are laws that apply throughout the country, each state can formulate its own laws and these must be followed within the limits of the state and punishable by those who disobey. The law of each state must be judged in its home state and cannot be imposed on another state that does not accept that law as the rule to be followed. Thus, in relation to the above question, we can conclude that if state law in the neighboring state requires that interrogation be recorded on video, that law has no impact on state interrogation that does not require such recording.