Facts
Barrett had been arrested for sexual assault. Barrett was given his Miranda rights and said he would not give a written statement without his attorney but had no problem talking about the incident. The tape recorder failed twice so officers transcribed what they had been told by Barrett.
Procedural History
Barrett moved to suppress but the trial court held the confession was admissible. The Connecticut Supreme Court reversed, finding that Barrett had invoked his right to counsel.
Issue(s)
Did the Connecticut Supreme Court err in finding that Barrett had invoked his right to counsel by refusing to make a written statement without his attorney?
Holding(s)
Yes.
Reasoning/Analysis
The Court found that interpretation is only required where the defendant’s words, understood as ordinary people would understand them, are ambiguous. Here, however, Barrett made clear his intentions, and they were honored by police.
Judgment/Outcome
The Court reversed and remanded the judgment of the Connecticut Supreme Court.
No comments:
Post a Comment