If a teenager is taken out of class to the principal's office, where a police officer wants to ask him questions, is he "in custody" for the purpose of requiring the Miranda warnings?  Does it matter if he is only 13? How about if he is "special ed"?  In the Matter of J.D.B., the North Carolina Supreme Court did not find the juvenile to be "in custody."

This Court adheres to the view that "the custody inquiry states an objective rule designed to give clear guidance to the police, while consideration of a suspect's individual characteristics--including his age--could be viewed as creating a subjective inquiry." Yarborough v. Alvarado, 541 U.S. 652, 668, 124 S. Ct. 2140, 2151-52, 158 L. Ed. 2d 938, 954 (2004) (citing Mathiason, 429 U.S. at 495-96, 97 S. Ct. at 714, 50 L. Ed. 2d at 719).¹ Under the circumstances of the case sub judice, we decline to extend the test for custody to include consideration of the age and academic standing of an individual subjected to questioning by police.

Footnote 1 notes that Alvarado was an AEDPA deference case and thus not strictly controlling, but the court finds the discussion persuasive nonetheless. Three justices dissented.

The U.S. Supreme Court today took up the case, now captioned J.D.B. v. North Carolina, No. 09-11121.