People v. Parker

In People v. Parker, 57 N.Y.2d 815, affg for reasons stated in 82 A.D.2d 661, the Court held that in an appropriate circumstance, a "parole" officer also may assume the role of a law enforcement agent implicating Miranda - the distinction being between proceedings within the parole system and criminal proceedings outside the parole system when the parole officer, in effect, acts as an agent of the State by gathering information and transferring it to the District Attorney as the foundation for the prosecution of a crime. In this regard, the Appellate Division stated in its opinion: The parolee is thus thrust on the tines of a dilemma if, on the one hand, he must truthfully state the circumstances underlying his arrest or face the consequence of the revocation of parole, and, on the other hand, risk conviction because his statements may be used as evidence against him in a prosecution based on the arrest. In this difficult aspect of the relationship between them, the parole officer necessarily assumes the role of a law enforcement agent.The reciprocal obligations thus arising from the relationship of parole have been said to exact "heavy psychological pressures' on a parolee to answer inquiries made by his parole officer, rendering inadmissible responsive incriminating statements made by a defendant to his parole officer in the absence of Miranda warnings. The distinction must be properly drawn between routine interviews required by parole, not implicating the need for Miranda warnings, and statements extracted by the parole officer and then offered against the parolee outside the structure of the parole system, as in a trial held on subsequent criminal charges against a parolee, necessitating Miranda warnings. (82 A.D.2d at 665-66.)