Prior Article 31 advisements generally do not carry over to subsequent questioning sessions, requiring fresh warnings each time interrogation resumes. Military courts apply a strict rule that new questioning sessions need new warnings, particularly when significant time passes, questioners change, or circumstances shift. This requirement recognizes that suspects’ understanding might fade, situations might change, or different offenses might be under investigation. The burden remains on the government to prove valid warnings preceded each questioning session.
Exceptions exist for genuinely continuous questioning with brief interruptions. Short breaks for bathroom visits, meals, or administrative tasks during ongoing interrogations might not require re-warning. However, overnight breaks, subject release from custody, or questioner changes typically trigger new warning requirements. The analysis examines whether a reasonable person would understand questioning had terminated versus temporarily paused. Factors include break duration, subject freedom during interruption, and whether formal session endings occurred.
Different offense investigations absolutely require new warnings even in continuous sessions. If questioning shifts from larceny to assault allegations, fresh Article 31 warnings must address the new suspected offenses. Investigators cannot rely on earlier warnings about different charges. This requirement prevents bait-and-switch tactics where cooperation regarding minor offenses leads to major offense questioning. Each distinct criminal investigation requires independent Article 31 compliance.
Best practices involve providing fresh warnings whenever any doubt exists about prior warning adequacy. Video recording each warning provision creates clear records preventing disputes. Defense counsel should challenge statements obtained without contemporaneous warnings, regardless of prior advisements. The strict approach to warning currency reflects recognition that Article 31 protections must be clear and immediate to serve their purpose. Service members should never assume prior warnings remain valid and should request fresh advisement before answering questions in new sessions.