Legal Question in Criminal Law in Michigan

Re: questionng a minor about something that supposedly happened when he was 13

The question isn't whether such an interview was "legal". The question is whether anything the person said to police was done so voluntarily. If it was an involuntary statement, then it would be ruled 'illegal' by a judge.

Voluntariness doesn't turn simply on the issue of whether a 17 year old's mommy/daddy was present or gave permission to interview the minor. In fact, a 17-year old is viewed as an 'adult' for purposes of criminal prosecution -- not the person's 18th birthday.

Factors reviewed to determine if, under the 'totality of the circumstances', the statement was made voluntarily include: the person's age; the person's lack of education or intelligence; the person's previous experience with police; repeated/prolonged questioning (exploited to get a statement); length of pre-interview detention; lack of advice of constitutional rights; whether the person was injured, intoxicated, drugged, in ill health when the statement was made; whether the person was deprived of food, sleep, medical attention; whether the person was threatened with abuse or was physically abused ... and, for a minor (person under 17) whether the parents were notified/present.

So, there are a lot of issues a judge would have to look at in a "Walker Hearing" before deciding of a statement was involuntary. Sometimes, a single factor can tip the scales (e.g., the person being 'in custody' and Miranda warnings not having been given to the person). But usually, the judge had to balance several of these factors that apply in the particular case.

Here, a 17-year old is usually old enough where the person's parents do not have to be in the loop. But what if the 17-year old has obvious mental limitations? That will be more important whan whether mom/dad was notified.