State v. Frank Plum, 2011AP956-CR, District 3, 11/1/11 court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication); for Plum: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity The officer who stopped Plum for suspected drunk driving testified that Plum refused to answer questions about the type or amount of medication he had consumed: this amounted to… Read more
A. In-Custody, 5th Amendment
State v. Devon L. Bean, 2011 WI App 129 (recommended for publication); for Bean: Scott D. Obernberger; case activity Sew-up Confession The fourth interrogation of Bean within a 60-hour period following his arrest did not, under the particular facts, amount to an impermissible “sew-up” confession. General principles. The question, in brief, is whether the time between arrest and formal… Read more
J.D.B. v. North Carolina, USSC No. 09-11101, 6/16/11, reversing 363 N. C. 664, 686 S. E. 2d 135 This case presents the question whether the age of a child subjected to police questioning is relevant to the custody analysis of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436 (1966) . It is beyond dispute that children will often feel bound to submit… Read more
on petition for review of unpublished decision; for Stevens: Paul G. LaZotte, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity Issues (provided by court): If a suspect in custody initiates communication with the police after previously invoking his Miranda right to consult with an attorney but has yet to again waive his Miranda rights, do the police violate… Read more
State v. Randy L. Martin, 2010AP505-CR, District 1, 5/3/11 court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication), reversed, 2012 WI 96; for Martin: Byron C. Lichstein; case activity Although Martin was in custody and had not received Miranda warnings, his statement wasn’t the result of “interrogation” and therefore wasn’t suppressible. When it appeared that Martin’s… Read more
State v. Brad E. Forbush, 2011 WI 25, reversing 2010 WI App 11; for Forbush: Craig A. Mastantuono, Rebecca M. Coffee; amicus: Colleen D. Ball, SPD, Milwaukee Appellate; case activity Forbush’s 6th amendment right to counsel had already attached – because a criminal complaint had been filed – and he had retained counsel before officers began interrogating him on… Read more
Docket Decision below (617 F.3d 813 (6th Cir 2010)) Question Presented (by Scotusblog): Whether this Court’s clearly established precedent under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 holds that a prisoner is always “in custody” for purposes of Miranda any time that prisoner is isolated from the general prison population and questioned about conduct occurring outside the prison… Read more
State v. Marlon M. Anderson, 2010AP742-CR, District 1/4, 12/9/10 court of appeals decision (3-judge, not recommended for publication); for Anderson: Angela Conrad Kachelski; Anderson BiC; State Resp. A defendant’s statement made voluntarily but in violation of Miranda isn’t admissible in the State’s case-in-chief, but is admissible if the defendant testifies and the statement is inconsistent with… Read more
