Monday, March 10, 2003

Amazing, Don't You Think U.S. Interrogating Children. We're shocked that this hasn't gotten more coverage. We are outraged. The CIA has acknowledged that last September, the seven... [TalkLeft: The Politics of Crime] The posted article is interesting, but don't miss the sprited debate in the comments being posted to this post on TalkLeft! 5:49:41 PM    comment [] A Possible Expansion of Miranda . . . Or Is That Too Much to Hope For? High Court to Revisit Miranda Ruling. The Court agreed to consider limits on police questioning, revisiting its landmark 1966 Miranda ruling that officers must warn people they arrest of their right to remain silent and see a lawyer. By The Associated Press. [New York Times: NYT HomePage] The case below was decided by the Eigth Circuit Court of Appeals which affirmed the district court's ruling suppressing the first statements given to the arresting officers, but admitting the repetition of those statements following Miranda warnings. Fellers decision (8th Cir.).  According to the Eigth Circuit the facts were: On February 24, 2000, two policemen went to Fellers’s Lincoln, Nebraska, home to arrest him for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine. After Fellers admitted the police to the house, they told him that they were there pursuant to an indictment and that they wanted to discuss his involvement in the use and distribution of methamphetamine and his associations with certain persons. Fellers responded by stating that he had associated with the named persons and that he had used methamphetamine. At no time during this conversation did the police advise Fellers of his Miranda rights. The officers then escorted Fellers to jail, where they advised him of his Miranda rights. Fellers signed a written Miranda waiver form and agreed to speak with the officers. During this conversation, Fellers reiterated the inculpatory statements made at his home and admitted his association with several more coconspirators. This case may well set the stage for either (1) a reinterpretation of "custodial interrogation" under Miranda or (2) a decision clarifying whether it is possible, and if so what is required, to remove the taint from an initially unlawful interrogation, or subsequent questioning.   1:01:22 PM    comment [] I Agree With Judge Posner . . .  Perhaps for the First Time Judge Posner explains that a competent criminal defense lawyer is adequate, but a clever one is better. Judge Posner explains that a competent criminal defense lawyer is adequate, but a clever one is better: As Seventh Circuit Judge Richard A. Posner explained in an opinion issued last week:If, however, the argument that the lawyer fails to make is a subtl... [How Appealing] 12:20:14 PM    comment []

© Copyright 2003 Richard Westling. Last update: 4/2/2003; 10:02:45 PM. This theme is based on the SoundWaves (blue) Manila theme.