tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post1977890842229954388..comments2024-03-25T20:06:39.794-05:00Comments on Grits for Breakfast: Rothgery Ramifications: 'Investigate your defendant before arresting him'Gritsforbreakfasthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10152152869466958902noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-28362860896018355882008-08-09T16:42:00.000-05:002008-08-09T16:42:00.000-05:00Does this mean that if someone has a lawyer, the S...Does this mean that if someone has a lawyer, the State cannot use overheard/recorded telephone conversations from jail?<BR/><BR/>I hope the answer is yes because each and every one of us should be protected from self incrimination i.e., the 5th ammendment.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-92186997615950569042008-08-07T18:57:00.000-05:002008-08-07T18:57:00.000-05:00Here is a taste of Gillespie County's policy argum...Here is a taste of Gillespie County's policy argument:<BR/><BR/><I>Adopting Rothgery's theory will also work serious<BR/>practical harms on law-enforcement efforts to<BR/>investigate and prevent crimes. Any extension of<BR/>the right to counsel into new contexts undeniably<BR/>hampers police investigations. "In seeking evidence<BR/>pertaining to pending charges, . . . the Government's<BR/>investigative powers are limited by the Sixth Amendment<BR/>rights of the accused." Maine v. Moulton, 474<BR/>U.S. 159, 179-180 (1985). <BR/><BR/>Every expansion of the<BR/>right to counsel eliminates additional scenarios under<BR/>which police can question, record, speak with, or<BR/>even just overhear a suspect without inadvertently<BR/>violating his constitutional rights and jeopardizing a<BR/>future prosecution.</I><BR/><BR/><BR/>That was a losing argument but the court didn't say it wasn't true, just that it wasn't a compelling enought reason to deny Rothgery his 6th amendment rights at the time of the 15.17 hearing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-20175710736935009192008-08-07T18:50:00.000-05:002008-08-07T18:50:00.000-05:00Gillespie County's submitted their brief on the me...Gillespie County's submitted their <BR/><A HREF="http://www.abanet.org/publiced/preview/briefs/pdfs/07-08/07-440_Respondent.pdf" REL="nofollow">brief on the merits</A> to the Supreme Court and in it they made a policy argument that said would cause all these problems. Look on page 51 and 53 and let them explain it.<BR/><BR/>By the way said this was not a sufficient reason to delay attachment of 6th amendment rights. They didn't say it wouldnt happen. They said they didnt care if it happened.<BR/><BR/>So now lets set if it happens! <BR/><BR/>Some fiesty defense lawyer might just MAKE IT HAPPEN.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-55562339797395006662008-08-07T18:21:00.000-05:002008-08-07T18:21:00.000-05:003:31 - Two questions:First, why would the extensio...3:31 - Two questions:<BR/><BR/>First, why would the extension of the right to counsel after its been requested be "undesirable"?<BR/><BR/>Also, is this really a "significant practical problem" or just a clarified requirement that police investigate a defendant before arresting them?<BR/><BR/>Soronel - If a person is Mirandized and says they want their lawyer, the system can't then delay counsel appointment so police can take another run at the D sans counsel. How would this be any different?Gritsforbreakfasthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10152152869466958902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-13387540429786353652008-08-07T17:03:00.000-05:002008-08-07T17:03:00.000-05:00Is it any surprise that a Collin County DA is OK i...Is it any surprise that a Collin County DA is OK ignoring SCOTUS rulings?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-47307085786081605332008-08-07T15:31:00.000-05:002008-08-07T15:31:00.000-05:00Take a look at the brief filed by Gillespie County...Take a look at the <A>brief filed by Gillespie County</A>. I find it particularly interesting that they claim that if the Supreme Court finds for Rothgery it would:<BR/><BR/>A. It would open the door to future <B>Undesirable Extensions</B> of the right to counsel (page 51)<BR/><BR/>B. It would create <B>significant practical problems</B> for law enforcement and local government.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Since the SCOTUS did find for Rothgery it will be interesting to see if these predictions come true.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-75095023338667290092008-08-07T15:22:00.000-05:002008-08-07T15:22:00.000-05:00I am Tiger Woods.I can see it now: a perfectly goo...I am Tiger Woods.<BR/><BR/>I can see it now: a perfectly good confession gets thrown out, even after the crook waives his right to have counsel present, because he later claims that he should have had the help of counsel to make the decision to waive the right to have counsel.<BR/><BR/>My head hurts.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-84964355803991508012008-08-07T14:49:00.000-05:002008-08-07T14:49:00.000-05:00I would think a careful investigator would be able...I would think a careful investigator would be able to conduct an interview up until the time counsel is actually appointed, with the proviso of a warning more specific than Miranda.<BR/><BR/>Something akin to, "I understand that I have previously requested counsel and that I have no duty to participate in any interview but I hereby waive presense of counsel for the purpose of the present interview."<BR/><BR/>Even then the LEO would need to be extremely careful, I would hope.Soronel Haetirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11639906179427371695noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-61626744657453427122008-08-07T14:36:00.000-05:002008-08-07T14:36:00.000-05:00"Nor are you a marine biologist." Huh?Nor am I a c..."Nor are you a marine biologist." Huh?<BR/><BR/>Nor am I a cocker spaniel. (?) ;)Gritsforbreakfasthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10152152869466958902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-60548775300756946792008-08-07T14:32:00.000-05:002008-08-07T14:32:00.000-05:00The smartest thing you said is: "I'm not an attor...The smartest thing you said is: "I'm not an attorney."<BR/>Nor are you a marine biologist.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-37504224761038751212008-08-07T14:25:00.000-05:002008-08-07T14:25:00.000-05:00I think you nailed this one, in all regards. Inve...I think you nailed this one, in all regards. Investigate before arrest? What a concept!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com