The fact that a house was raided twice in one day may or may not provide a basis for dismissal of charges, depending upon the basis of each raid. However, if a person is in custody, and makes an incriminating statement to a law enforcement agent without the agent's having advised the person of his or he Miranda warnings (and having obtained a waiver of the person's right to remain silent), any incriminating statement may be excluded from evidence. The result is the same if the statement was not freely and voluntarily given, regardless of whether the person was "Mirandized." The exclusion of a statement does not result in the dismissal of a case automatically; the Government may or may not have enough other "untainted" evidence to proceed with the prosecution.
Joshua Sabert Lowther, Esq.
NATIONAL FEDERAL DEFENSE GROUP
A Miranda violation is not grounds for dismissal. In a case where the prosecution has no proof without the defendant's confession, a successful motion to suppress the confession for failure to comply with Miranda might lead to a decision by the prosecutor not to pursue the case.
I do not understand your question about the raids. It is difficult to think why two raids in twenty-four hours would be grounds for dismissal, but if either raid was for some reason improper there would be a question of what evidence would have to be suppressed. If the case for the prosecution was heavily dependent on suppressed evidence then, again, the prosecutor might be unable to pursue the case.
Constitutional violations that occur during the investigation may give rise to grounds to exclude the evidence that was collected as a result. Thus, if the search was illegal, the evidence seized during the search could be excluded. If the defendant was questioned while in custody without Miranda warnings, the statement could be excluded. Either way, that would only lead to dismissal if the prosecutor decided there was insufficient evidence to prosecute without that evidence. The decision whether to dismiss is up to the prosecutor. There is nothing wrong per se with doing two searches on the same day, depending on the circumstances. In addition, there is no requirement that Miranda warnings be given unless the defendant is questioned in custody. You should discuss these issues with your attorney.
This answer is provided for educational purposes only and is not intended as the practice of law in any jurisdiction in which I am not licensed. The answer does not constitute legal advice nor does it create an attorney-client relationship. The answer is based only on the information provided, and may be inaccurate in the context of additional facts that have not been provided. The questioner should be aware that I am only licensed to practice law in the state and federal courts of Minnesota. Accordingly, before taking any action or refraining from taking any action, the questioner should consult with an attorney licensed to practice in his or her jurisdiction.