What Are My Rights as a Suspect in a Criminal Investigation?

Answer:

As a suspect in a criminal investigation in Georgia, you have two foundational constitutional rights that apply from the moment law enforcement contacts you. First, the Fifth Amendment guarantees your right against self-incrimination — you cannot be compelled to answer questions that could incriminate you, whether you are in custody, at a police station voluntarily, or simply being called by a detective. Second, you have the right to have an attorney present before and during any questioning. Once you clearly invoke your right to counsel, law enforcement must stop all questioning. Critically, exercising either right cannot be disclosed to a jury as evidence of guilt — declining to speak, hiring an attorney, or canceling a scheduled interview are all constitutionally protected choices a prosecutor cannot use against you at trial.

Being contacted by a law enforcement investigator or detective — whether by phone, in person, or through a formal written request for an interview — does not obligate you to speak to them, meet with them, or cooperate with their investigation in any way. The rights available to suspects in a criminal investigation are among the most important and most misunderstood protections in the American legal system.

The Right Against Self-Incrimination

The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution — and Georgia’s parallel constitutional provision — guarantees every person the right to refuse to answer questions that could incriminate them. This right is not limited to formal custodial interrogations. It applies any time law enforcement seeks to question you as a suspect, whether you are in custody, at a police station voluntarily, or simply speaking to an investigator who has contacted you by phone.

Critically, exercising this right cannot be used against you in court. If you decline to participate in an investigative interview, the jury will never be told that you refused. The law specifically protects this choice from being treated as evidence of guilt — because allowing a refusal to cooperate with the government to be presented to a jury as evidence of consciousness of guilt would effectively destroy the right against self-incrimination.

You Do Not Have to Go In for an Interview

When a detective contacts a suspect and requests an interview, the request is almost never truly voluntary from the investigative standpoint. Law enforcement contacts suspects because they are building a case and believe the suspect may provide information that advances that case — whether through incriminating admissions, inconsistencies that can be exploited, or statements that place the suspect at a relevant location or in a relevant relationship.

The decision not to participate in an interview cannot be disclosed to a jury. Hiring a lawyer cannot be disclosed to a jury. Canceling a scheduled interview cannot be disclosed to a jury. Each of these is a constitutionally protected exercise of rights, and none of them can be characterized to a fact finder as evidence of guilt. Understanding this is essential: the fear that declining to cooperate will make you “look guilty” to a jury is based on a misunderstanding of the law. It will not.

The Right to Counsel

Any suspect who is contacted by law enforcement has the right to have an attorney present before and during any questioning. Once you invoke your right to counsel — by clearly stating that you want an attorney — law enforcement is required to cease all questioning until an attorney is present. This applies in custodial situations and in many non-custodial contexts where the right is clearly invoked.

The most important practical step any person who has been contacted by law enforcement as part of a criminal investigation can take is to contact a criminal defense attorney before responding to that contact in any way. Do not agree to an interview, do not call the investigator back to explain your side of the story, and do not take any action in response to the contact without first consulting with counsel. An attorney can evaluate the situation, advise you on what the investigation may involve, and guide you on how to protect your rights from the very beginning.

Brett and his team were beyond supportive, helpful, gracious, caring and knowledgeable! We went through the most challenging and difficult time in our life and he was there every step of the way. With results we could never have imagined but definitely prayed for.

Not to mention his level of professionalism. From the first time we spoke to the first time we saw him in court. He stood out from almost every other attorney there. We were so appreciative that our attorney looked and was so professional, pulled together and prepared. When so many others were none of these things.

Thank you just doesn’t seem like enough to convey our feelings and appreciation.

Karen L.

I tried to write this several times and it brought me to tears. First may I say this has been the hardest three years of my life. Five lawyers I interviewed and none even understood the law as it applied to my case. So I thought I would try one more and it was Brett. From our first conversation together I knew he understood the law and was the perfect one for the case. I want to say how he prepared the case and presented it, achieving a full dismissal and ruling the police violated my first amendment rights. Complete genius!!!!

If you're reading this review and unsure, stop...call Brett. He always returned my call or texts within a couple hours, never more than 24 hours. He was always courteous and knowledgeable, trust me he talked me off the ledge a couple times. I would have given him 10 stars but 5 was the only option. Thank you Brett for all you did for me!!!!!