USSC decision In a pathmarking decision, Miranda v. Arizona , 384 U. S. 436, 471 (1966) , the Court held that an individual must be “clearly informed,” prior to custodial questioning, that he has, among other rights, “the right to consult with a lawyer and to have the lawyer with him during interrogation.” The question presented… Read more
A. In-Custody, 5th Amendment
court of appeals decision, review granted 3/16/10; for Forbush: Craig A. Mastantuono, Rebecca M. Coffee Post-Charge Assertion of Right to Counsel during Interrogation The mere fact that an attorney represents a defendant formally charged with a crime doesn’t bar the police from questioning the defendant; State v. Todd Dagnall, 2000 WI 82 (“Dagnall was not required… Read more
State v. Jennifer L. Ward, 2009 WI 60, affirming unpublished opinion For Ward: T. Christopher Kelly Issue/Holding: Taken individually and collectively, Ward’s 3 statements were voluntary, weighing personal characteristics against police conduct. Personal characteristics, ¶23. Ward was: “relatively sophisticated and intelligent”; 35 years old; a high school graduate; prior conviction; the daughter of a police chief. Her “unprompted… Read more
State v. Marchand Grady, 2009 WI 47, affirming summary order For Grady: Carl W. Chessir Issue: Whether administration of Miranda rights in a noncustodial setting obviated the need for re-administration of rights when the interview became custodial about 2 and one-half hours later. Holding: ¶15 Grady advances a creative, but not heretofore unheard of argument. He asks us… Read more
State v. Colin G. Schloegel, 2009 WI App 85 For Schloegel: Sarvan Singh Issue/Holding: High school student Schloegel was not in custody for Miranda purposes, notwithstanding that he was frisked by police officer, compelled under school policy to consent to search of his car and asked, prior to formal arrest, incriminatory questions; analogy to State v. Dale Gruen, 218… Read more
State v. Todd W. Berggren, 2009 WI App 82, PFR filed 6/24/09 For Berggren: Robert G. LeBell Issue/Holding: Defendant’s request to call parents so they could call attorney for him was an insufficiently unequivocal assertion of his right to counsel: ¶36 We agree with the trial court’s conclusion that even if we assume that the defendant made… Read more
State v. Todd W. Berggren, 2009 WI App 82, PFR filed 6/24/09 For Berggren: Robert G. LeBell Issue/Holding: Where Miranda rights were properly given at the outset of the “first segment” of interrogation, re-administration of rights wasn’t necessary for “second segment,” several hours later, ¶¶24-28… Read more
State v. Scott M. Hambly, 2008 WI 10, affirming 2006 WI App 256 For Hambly: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue: Whether, following his in-custody invocation of right to counsel, Hambly’s subsequent statements that he didn’t know what was going on (eliciting the officer’s response that he’d sold cocaine to an informant) and wanted to talk to… Read more
