Miranda Rights Part 1

Case Name: People v. Thomas , CalSup , Case #: S067519

Opinion Date: 7/23/2012 , DAR #: 10085

Case Holding:

The rule of Edwards v. Arizona (1981) 451 U.S. 477 does not preclude questioning about a different criminal investigation after the suspect reinitiates contact with police. In this death penalty case, appellant moved to exclude statements as violative of Edwards; the motion was denied and the statements introduced at trial. Affirmed. Thomas turned himself in to Oakland police about a murder at a BART station. He was already a suspect in an attempted robbery being investigated by Hayward police. During questioning about the attempted robbery, appellant invoked the right to counsel and the police terminated the interview. He later reinitiated contact with a detective. Appellant indicated that he had invoked his right to counsel, he had spoken to an attorney, and he now wanted to talk and set things right. He was advised of his Miranda rights again and he confirmed several times that he now wanted to talk without counsel present. He then discussed the attempted robbery. Two days later, sergeants investigating the BART murder met with appellant. They advised him of his Miranda rights without mentioning what specific case they were investigating. Appellant waived his rights and ultimately made incriminating statements about the BART murder. The Edwards rule did not preclude introduction of the statements. There was no indication of police badgering; there was no reason to doubt that Thomas could have invoked his right to counsel since he had previously stopped the interrogation by that means; and, there was no affirmative limit to questioning as Thomas had reinitiated it. The purpose of the Edwards rule would not be served by excluding appellant's confession. His failure to mention other crimes could not be understood as an assertion that questioning about other crimes would be off limits.

If you are arrested, invoke your Miranda rights as soon as humanly possible. Under Miranda, if you are detained, the police agency must read you your Miranda rights before speaking to you. These rights are; the right to remain silent, anything you say can be used against you, you have the right to an attorney, if you cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed to you. Then the police will ask you if you understand and give up these rights.

If you invoke your Miranda rights, the police cannot talk to you until a lawyer is present, and in all actuality, they will just stop talking to you. It's rare that I'm called to a police station, or jail to resume questioning when a client invokes Miranda. But in the event that you do invoke Miranda NEVER EVER GIVE UP YOUR MIRANDA RIGHTS AFTER YOU INVOKE. In the case above, the defendant properly invoked his Miranda rights and then gave them up and gave incriminating statements about a murder case he was a suspect in. He might very well be not serving a life sentence at this time had he merely invoked his rights to remain silent and just kept his mouth shut.

To get a family member to keep his mouth shut in the case he is arrested contact me right now. I will answer the phone.

George Derieg attorney at law
www.eastbayattorney.com

510-355-2747