Miranda Rights for Non-English Speakers: What to Know in Florida

May 19, 2025 Don Pumphrey, Jr. Criminal Defense Social Share

When someone is taken into custody and subject to police interrogation, it is a constitutional requirement they be notified of their Miranda rights. These include the right to remain silent, the right to have an attorney (including during interrogation), and a notification of the fact that anything they say can and will be used against them in court. 

If someone does not knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waive their Miranda rights and confesses in response to custodial interrogation, this confession is subject to suppression. But for non-English speakers, this process may be more complicated. If officers cannot communicate in the language of the person being arrested, does a Miranda reading that the arrestee does not even understand satisfy the constitutional requirement? 

The answer is no. This blog will explore when a Miranda waiver is knowing, intelligent, and voluntary by someone who does not speak English, and when a confession by a foreign language-speaking defendant may be rendered inadmissible due to improper Mirandization. 

Courts in Florida have been clear – an arrestee must be clearly notified of their Miranda rights to ensure their constitutional rights are upheld. The right to an interpreter for non-English speaking defendants, including during Miranda readings and subsequent police interrogation, is grounded in the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. Tehrani v. State, 764 So.2d 895 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000).

Moreover, a defendant’s failure to assert the right to a translator before or during interrogation does not make anything they say during a police interrogation, such as a confession, admissible against them at trial. This is because their inability to understand what is occurring may be the cause of their failure to assert the right. Id.; Benitez v. State, 57 So.3d 939 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011). 

Courts in Florida have heard various cases stemming from foreign-language speaking defendants claiming they were unable to knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waive their rights before making statements that were used against them at trial. State v. Joseph, 51 So.3d 497 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010); State v. Delgado-Armenta, 429 So.2d 328 (Fla. 3d. DCA 1983).

In Joseph, officers read a Miranda form in both English and Joseph’s native language, Creole, to him before he was interrogated. Joseph challenged the constitutional adequacy of the readings. Reviewing the forms and noting that Creole was Joseph’s native language, the court ruled that it was clearly communicated to him that he had a right to an attorney present during questioning before he declined this. Thus, his waiver was considered valid.

Conversely, the Delgado-Armenta court held that a Spanish-speaking defendant who was read his rights in Spanish both orally and on a Miranda form did not knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waive his rights before confessing. This was because the text of the Spanish form did not notify Delgado-Armenta of the right to an attorney during police questioning.

Moreover, a defendant’s invocation in a foreign language of their desire to remain silent is equally as valid as an English invocation of that right. In Cuervo v. State, the appellant invoked his right to remain silent by stating “No quiero declarar nada” (“I don’t want to declare anything”). Still, he was subject to additional questioning, and eventually confessed.

The court held the interrogation should have ended when Cuervo made this statement, as it was a clear and unequivocal invocation of his right to remain silent that prohibited further questioning. Cuervo v. State, 967 So.2d 155 (Fla. 2007).

In sum, a defendant who does not speak English must still knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waive their Miranda rights for post-arrest statements to be used against them. This involves ensuring a defendant’s right to an interpreter, accurate translation of Miranda warnings, and ceasing questioning when they invoke their rights. 

If the validity of a non-English speaking arrestee’s post-arrest statements are challenged as inadmissible, courts will evaluate whether their Miranda waiver was proper by considering the totality of the circumstances.

If someone is concerned about the potential violation of their Miranda rights or the rights of a loved one, it is crucial to find experienced and aggressive legal representation as soon as possible. This vital decision could make the difference in whether or not a person is subject to a lengthy prison term and hefty fines.

Stand Your Ground Defense Lawyer in Tallahassee, FL

Don Pumphrey, Jr. is a Former Prosecutor, Former State Police Officer, Lifetime Member of the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers; for over 25 years as a private defense attorney who is Trusted, Experienced, Aggressive in Criminal Defense as a Trial Attorney, Criminal Lawyer, Criminal Defense Lawyer for the accused in Florida State Courts located in Tallahassee, Florida but handling cases throughout the State of Florida.

Don Pumphrey, Jr. and the Tallahassee criminal defense attorneys at Pumphrey Law have decades of experience fighting on behalf of clients and winning. Call Pumphrey Law now at (850) 681-7777 to learn more about what we can do for you. Our lawyers will be happy to provide you with a free consultation.

  Social Share