State v. Willie B. Cole, 2008 WI App 178 For Cole: Scott A. Szabrowicz Issue/Holding: ¶25 … If a suspect requests counsel at any time during the interview, he or she is not subject to further questioning until a lawyer has been made available or the suspect himself or herself reinitiates conversation. … ¶26 The Fifth… Read more
A. In-Custody, 5th Amendment
State v. Scott M. Hambly, 2008 WI 10, affirming 2006 WI App 256 For Hambly: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶93 The defendant summarizes his argument that he did not voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently waive his right to counsel, stating that at the time of his arrest, he was hungry, alone in the back seat… Read more
State v. Scott M. Hambly, 2008 WI 10, affirming 2006 WI App 256 For Hambly: Martha K. Askins, SPD, Madison Appellate Issue/Holding: ¶77 Whether a suspect “initiates” communication or dialogue does not depend solely on the time elapsing between the invocation of the right to counsel and the suspect’s beginning an exchange with law enforcement, although the… 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 a suspect’s in-custody invocation of right to counsel before administration of Miranda warnings triggers the Edwards bar on interrogation absent the suspect’s reinitiating communication with the police. Holding: ¶23 The State argues that in the… Read more
State v. Willie B. Cole, 2008 WI App 178 For Cole: Scott A. Szabrowicz Issue/Holding: “Under the above case law, it is clear that, if Cole did invoke his Fifth Amendment/Miranda right to counsel when he was arrested on the battery charge, then the statement he gave Officer Riley while still in custody is inadmissible even… Read more
State v. Thomas S. Mayo, 2007 WI 78, affirming unpublished opinion For Mayo: Keith A. Findley, UW Law School Issue/Holding: ¶46 We agree with Mayo’s position, and the State’s concession at oral argument, that the prosecutor’s remarks on Mayo’s pre-Miranda silence, and the testimony she elicited in that regard, during the State’s opening statement and case-in-chief, violated Mayo’s… Read more
State v. Jeffrey L. Torkelson, 2007 WI App 272, PFR filed 11/30/07 For Torkelson: Timothy A. Provis Issue/Holding: Custody, for purposes of Miranda, requires that the suspect’s freedom be restricted to a degree associated with formal arrest, and is as gauged by a multi-factor test articulated in State v. Zan Morgan, 2002 WI App 124, ¶¶13-14. None of those… Read more
State v. Heather A. Markwardt, 2007 WI App 242, PFR filed 11/29/07 For Markwardt: Richard Hahn Issue/Holding: ¶35 The circuit court relied on statements Markwardt made one hour and eleven minutes into the interview for its ruling that she had properly asserted her right to remain silent. Her exact words were: “Then put me in jail. Just… Read more
