Facts
Davis was interviewed at the Naval Investigative Service office regarding a murder outside a pool hall on the naval base. Davis waived his right to remain silent and to counsel, both orally and in writing. Later, Davis stated “Maybe I should talk to a lawyer” and after clarification, stated “No, I don’t want a lawyer.”
Procedural History
Davis moved to suppress his statements and the military judge denied the motion, finding that Davis’ statement was not a request for counsel. The United States Court of Military Appeals affirmed.
Issue(s)
Did the lower courts err in not suppressing Davis’ statements when he made a reference to counsel that was insufficiently clear to invoke the Edwards prohibition?
Holding(s)
No.
Reasoning/Analysis
The Court found that if a suspect makes a reference to an attorney that is ambiguous or equivocal, our precedents do not require the cessation of questioning. The suspect must unambiguously request counsel. The NIS agents therefore were not required to stop questioning Davis, though it was entirely proper for them to clarify whether Davis wanted an attorney.
Judgment/Outcome
The Court affirmed the judgment of the lower courts.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment