Result – statements suppressed, and will be in the 9th because of Sessoms v. Runnels, No. 08-17790, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 17206 (9th Cir. 2012) Wow. What about Davis v. United States? Davis doesn’t apply because the ambiguous request came BEFORE the accused was advised of his Miranda rights. So, why isn’t there a similar…
Continue reading ›There are two decisions issued today of some relevance to military justice practitioners. One relates to Miranda and another to SORNA. As to Berghuis v. Thompkins, Kent Scheidegger of crimeandconsequences blog says: The Miranda rule remains intact in that the police must warn suspects of their rights and that an invocation of those rights by…
Continue reading ›Thanks to OpinoJuris for pointing us to the 11th Circuit decision in United States v. Frank. You will recollect that CAAF has found that the CP related statutes don’t apply overseas. Here is part of the OJ summary. The Eleventh Circuit upheld the conviction finding that (1) Miranda warnings were unnecessary; (2) the statute applied…
Continue reading ›The court has decided Maryland v. Shatzer (background documents on SCOTUSWiki here ) and also Florida v. Powell (background documents on SCOTUSWiki here). Both cases relate to “Miranda” rights and confessions. In Powell, the issue was how much detail must go into a “Miranda” warning in order to be sufficient, in Shatzer the court addresses…
Continue reading ›And pigs have wings and can fly. The media continues to make the comment that investigators are waiting to talk with Major Hasan, at Fort Hood, and once they do we’ll know more about his motives. Huh? We’ll find out at court-martial what each party is suggesting are the reasons and motives, but unlikely before…
Continue reading ›
