Appellate Law

CA1: a normal restart of questioning Miranda problem

By S. COTUS

US v. Lugo-Guerrero, No. 06-2745 affirms a conviction.  The big issue is whether un-Mirandized statements were improperly admitted.  The strange thing about Federal Miranda battles now, is judges seem to think that people that don?t properly invoke their right to remain silent (i.e. by requesting a lawyer that they already have on retainer) probably are criminals, anyway. 

Strangely, the District Court judge did not agree with all of the USMJ?s conclusions.  After some waiver machinations, the First concludes ?FBI task force agents were not ?automatically forbidden? from later resuming the interrogation just because Lugo had earlier declined to make a statement to Puerto Rico police.?  The First then concludes that the defendant?s ?right? to cut off questioning was ?honored? and he was only questioned by other police later.

A sufficiency challenge is rejected.

A denial motion to suppress evidence of other crimes, on ?substantially more prejudicial than probative? grounds is held not to be an abuse of discretion.

Full post as published by Appellate Law and Practice on April 16, 2008 (boomark / email).