Genovevo Salinas v. Texas, USSC No. 12-246, 6/17/13 United States Supreme Court decision, affirming Salinas v. State, 369 S.W.2d 176 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012) Consistent with the rule applied to a defendant’s silence after being informed of his Miranda rights, the Supreme Court holds that a suspect who is being questioned before he was arrested… Read more
3. Assertion/waiver of rights
State v. Matthew A. Lonkoski, 2013 WI 30, affirming unpublished court of appeals decision; case activity About 30 minutes into being questioned by police about the death of his daughter, Matthew Lonkoski said he wanted a lawyer. (¶12). Under Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 (1981), the invocation of the right to counsel would mean the police… Read more
State v. Corey J. Uhlenberg, 2013 WI App 59; case activity Miranda custody Uhlenberg was in “custody” during an interview at the police department, so the circuit court should have suppressed the statements Uhlenberg made during the interrogation after he requested an attorney: ¶11 Throughout its arguments, the State emphasizes the fact that the detective repeatedly… Read more
State v. Lee Yang, 2012AP1126-CR, Districts 1/4, 2/28/13; court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity Yang was being interrogated about the shooting death of his ex-wife’s boyfriend when he invoked his right to counsel. Interrogation ceased and he was taken to jail. (¶¶3, 5). Several hours later, Gomez, a homicide detective, visited… Read more
Review of per curiam court of appeals decision; case activity Issues (from the Petition for Review): 1. Without obtaining a warrant, police tracked Subdiaz-Osorio’s location through the signal transmitted from his cell phone. Did the trial court err in denying his motion to suppress this evidence? 2. Did the court of appeals in deciding that… Read more
On review of certification request; case activity Invocation of the right to counsel Issues (Composed by On Point) 1. Does the Wisconsin Constitution provide more protection than Maryland v. Shatzer, ___U.S. ___, 130 S. Ct. 1213 (2010) (holding that, even if a defendant has invoked his or her right to counsel, law enforcement may give… Read more
court of appeals certification review granted 1/15/13; case activity Issues Certified: In Maryland v. Shatzer, ___U.S. ___, 130 S. Ct. 1213 (2010), the United States Supreme Court held that, even if a defendant has invoked his or her right to counsel, law enforcement may give the Miranda[2] warnings again so long as the defendant has been released from custody… Read more
on review of unpublished decision; case activity Issue (composed by On Point) Whether, after asserting his right to counsel, Lonkonski initiated further communication with the police so as to allow admissibility of his ensuing statement, Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477, 483-85 (1981). There may be a threshold dispute as to whether Lonkoski was in custody… Read more
