Jesse J. Holland
Court to decide on expansion of Miranda rights
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court is once again trying to clarify what the long-established Miranda rights require the police to do, with the justices on Wednesday agreeing to decide whether officers can interrogate a suspect who said he understood his rights but didn’t invoke them.
The high court agreed to hear an appeal from Michigan prosecutors who had their conviction of Van Chester Thompkins thrown out by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals because police kept talking to Thompkins after reading him his rights — despite Thompkins not verbally agreeing to invoke or withdraw his Miranda rights.
Thompkins was arrested for murder in 2001 and interrogated by police for three hours. At the beginning, Thompkins was read his Miranda rights and said he understood.
The officers in the room said Thompkins said little during the interrogation, occasionally answering “yes,” ”no,” ”I don’t know,” nodding his head and making eye contact as his responses. But when one of the officers asked him if he prayed for forgiveness for “shooting that boy down,” Thompkins said, “Yes.”
He was convicted, but on appeal he wanted that statement thrown out because he said he invoked his Miranda rights by being uncommunicative with the interrogating officers.
The Cincinnati-based appeals court agreed and threw out his confession and conviction.
“Thompkins’ persistent silence for nearly three hours in response to questioning and repeated invitations to tell his side of the story offered a clear and unequivocal message to the officers: Thompkins did not wish to waive his rights,” the court said.
Michigan prosecutors said that would be a new addition to Miranda rights, and they want the Supreme Court to reinstate Thompkins’ conviction.
“Neither Miranda or its progeny prohibit interaction between an officer and a defendant after warnings have been given and acknowledged but before the invocation of rights,” Michigan Attorney General Michael Cox said in court papers.
The court will hear arguments in Thompkins’ case in 2010.
The Supreme Court has had to repeatedly clarify exactly what authorities have to do after reading a suspect his Miranda rights, which come from the 1966 decision requiring police to tell suspects they have the right to remain silent and the rights to have a lawyer represent them, even if they can’t afford one.
The Thompkins case is the second Miranda case the court will decide during this term. They will hear arguments on Dec. 7 on whether suspects have to be told that they have the right to have a lawyer present during questioning by police.
In that case, Kevin Dwayne Powell was given Miranda warnings that included telling him he had a right to a lawyer before questioning. Powell’s lawyers appealed, saying police did not tell him he had a right to have a lawyer during his police interrogation.
The Florida Supreme Court overturned the conviction, but the state wants the high court to throw out that decision.
The case is Berghuis v. Thompkins, 08-1470.
Related News
Supreme Court begins with argument over prisoner's old request for lawyer in sex abuse caseOctober 5th, 2009 Court begins with argument over lawyer requestWASHINGTON — The Supreme Court began its new term Monday with Justice Sonia Sotomayor on the bench as the court tried to hash out how long a suspect's request for a lawyer should be considered valid by police and the courts. The high court, listening to its first arguments of the session, seemed skeptical of defense lawyers' arguments that police should be banned from talking to a suspect without a lawyer present because of the possibility that the suspect had asked for a lawyer in related — and even unrelated — cases years ago.
Supreme Court opens with case on prisoner's request for a lawyer; Sotomayor jumps right inOctober 5th, 2009 Court opens with case on prisoner's bid for lawyerWASHINGTON — The Supreme Court began its new term Monday by indicating a willingness to limit how long a suspect's request for a lawyer should remain valid, and new Justice Sonia Sotomayor wasted little time in letting her voice be heard by questioning the lawyers. The high court seemed skeptical of defense lawyers' arguments that police should be banned from talking to a suspect without a lawyer present if the suspect had asked for a lawyer in related — and even unrelated — cases years earlier.
Summary of actions by the Supreme Court on WednesdaySeptember 30th, 2009 Summary of actions by the Supreme CourtThe Supreme Court on Wednesday:
— Decided to hear arguments over whether strict local and state gun control laws violate the Second Amendment. A federal appeals court upheld a handgun ban in Chicago, but gun rights supporters appealed to the high court, noting its decision last year striking down a similar ban in the District of Columbia.
Supreme Court will decide whether states, cities can limit gun rightsSeptember 30th, 2009 High court to look at local gun control lawsWASHINGTON — The Supreme Court agreed Wednesday to decide whether strict local and state gun control laws violate the Second Amendment, ensuring another high-profile battle over the rights of gun owners. The court said it will review a lower court ruling that upheld a handgun ban in Chicago.
US extradites suspect in high-profile kidnapping to MexicoSeptember 25th, 2009 US extradites kidnapping suspect to MexicoMEXICO CITY — The United States has extradited to Mexico a woman wanted in a kidnapping that grabbed headlines after the victim's mother outperformed police in finding several suspects. The Attorney General's Office says that Brenda Quevedo is in the custody of Mexican federal authorities.
Terror suspects in Australia wanted their attack to be 'monstrous,' a court hearsAugust 25th, 2009 Australia terror suspects wanted to 'strike big'MELBOURNE, Australia — Alleged conspirators in a terror plot to attack an Australian army base hated non-Muslims and described their planned suicide mission as a "great, monstrous thing," a court heard Tuesday. Phone calls between the men and with an Islamic cleric in Somalia that were intercepted by police show the suspects thought they could kill up to 10 soldiers in about 20 minutes before being killed themselves in the attack, according to police records presented to the court.
UK court dismisses requests against US extradition in connection with '98 embassy bombingsAugust 7th, 2009 Terror suspects lose case against US extraditionLONDON — A British court has dismissed motions by two terror suspects asking not to be extradited to the United States. Khalid al-Fawwaz and Abel Abdel-Bary are wanted in the U.S.
Authorities: 1 shooter killed Panhandle couple, suspect tells investigatorsJuly 21st, 2009 Officials: Suspect says 1 man killed Fla. couplePENSACOLA, Fla.
National Guard troops seize police station under control of Chavez opponent in VenezuelaJuly 15th, 2009 Troops seize police station in VenezuelaCARACAS, Venezuela — Dozens of National Guard troops seized control of a police station controlled by a leading opponent of President Hugo Chavez on Wednesday, adding to tensions between Venezuela's government and elected opposition officials. About 40 National Guard troops tossed tear gas canisters at a police precinct post in the town of Curiepe, east of Caracas, shortly before dawn, said Elisio Guzman, director of the Miranda state police.
Supreme Court to decide whether suspects must be told lawyer can be present during questioningJune 22nd, 2009 Court to tackle clarity of Miranda warnings againWASHINGTON — "You have the right to remain silent." Most people only hear those words while watching cop shows on TV. They usually zone out for the rest of the now familiar Miranda warning to people under arrest.
Supreme Court to weigh in on rights of Fla. beachfront property ownersJune 15th, 2009 High court steps into Fla. beach erosion disputeWASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has stepped into a property-rights dispute over plans to rebuild eroded beaches on Florida's Gulf coast.
Obama administration asks court to reconsider allowing CIA renditions suit against BoeingJune 13th, 2009 Feds ask court to reconsider CIA renditions suitSAN FRANCISCO — The U.S. Department of Justice is asking a federal appeals court to reconsider its decision to allow a Boeing Co.
Britain's highest court ruled terror suspects must be told why they are considered dangerousJune 10th, 2009 UK court: terror suspects must be told allegationsLONDON — Britain's highest court ruled Wednesday that prosecutors can no longer refuse to tell terror suspects held under a house arrest-style program why they are deemed a risk to national security. The ruling follows an appeal by three suspected terrorists who said they'd never been informed why authorities regard them as dangerous.
Supreme Court to decide whether bankruptcy law violates lawyers' free speechJune 8th, 2009 Court to decide if bankruptcy law stifles lawyersWASHINGTON — The Supreme Court will decide whether a new bankruptcy law applies to lawyers and whether their free speech rights are violated by a ban on telling clients to incur more debt. The high court on Monday agreed to hear arguments from both a law firm and government regulators challenging a lower court ruling.
Supreme Court to decide whether to limit 'business method' patentsJune 1st, 2009 Court to decide whether to limit patentsWASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has decided to take on an appeal that could decide whether someone can get a patent for a complex business idea. The high court on Monday decided to hear an appeal from Bernard Bilski and Rand Warsaw, who attempted to patent a method for managing weather-related risk having to do with trading in commodities.
Loading ...