Michigan v. Jackson
Encyclopedia
Michigan v. Jackson, , was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court regarding the Sixth Amendment's
right to counsel
in a police
interrogation
. In a decision written by Justice Stevens, the Court held that once an accused individual has claimed a right to counsel at a plea hearing or other court proceeding, a waiver of that right during later police questioning would be invalid unless the accused individual initiated the communication.
This decision was overruled by the Supreme Court in Montejo v. Louisiana
, 556 U.S. ___ (2009), by a 5–4 decision.
Rudy Bladel had been convicted of murdering three railroad employees at the Amtrak Station in Jackson, Michigan
, on December 31, 1978.
Bladel, a disgruntled former employee, had been arrested three months later in Indiana
and extradited to Michigan. He had agreed to talk to the police without counsel. At his arraignment
he requested that counsel be appointed for him because he was indigent. The detective in charge of the investigation was present at the arraignment. A notice of appointment was then mailed to a law firm, but before the law firm received the notice, two police officers interviewed Bladel in the county jail and obtained a confession
from him. Prior to that questioning, the officers had advised Bladel of his Miranda rights. Although Bladel had inquired about his representation several times since the arraignment, he was not told that a law firm had been appointed to represent him.
Bladel then objected to the admissibility
of the confession but the trial court overruled his objection. He was convicted and sentenced to three concurrent life sentences. On appeal from his conviction and sentence, Bladel challenged the confession. The Michigan Court of Appeals
first rejected that challenge and affirmed the conviction, but, after reconsideration in the light of a recent decision by the State Supreme Court, it reversed and remanded for a new trial. The Michigan Supreme Court
then granted the prosecutor's application for leave to appeal, and considered the case with respondent Jackson's appeal of his conviction.
to commit second-degree murder after allegedly taking part in a wife's plan to have her husband killed on July 12, 1979. He made a number of statements to police after his arrest but before his arraignment. During his arraignment, Jackson requested that counsel be appointed for him.
On the following morning, before he had an opportunity to consult with counsel, two police officers obtained another statement from Jackson to "confirm" that he was the person who had shot the victim. As was true of the prearraignment statements, the questioning was preceded by advice of his Miranda rights and Jackson's agreement to proceed without counsel being present.
The Michigan Court of Appeals held that Jackson's later statement was properly received in evidence. Accordingly, it affirmed Jackson's conviction of murder, although it set aside the conspiracy conviction on unrelated grounds.
The U.S. Supreme Court had held previously in Edwards v. Arizona
, , that an accused person in custody who has,
The Court of Appeals had distinguished the Edwards rule on the ground that Jackson's request for an attorney had been made at his arraignment, whereas Edwards' request had been made during a custodial interrogation by the police. Noting that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel attached at the time of the arraignments, the Michigan Supreme Court concluded that the Edwards rule,
, White
, Marshall
and Blackmun.
The Court had held previously that the "Sixth Amendment guarantees the accused, at least after the initiation of formal charges, the right to rely on counsel as a 'medium' between him and the State." Maine v. Moulton, at 176. The Court found that therefore, the Sixth Amendment right to counsel at a postarraignment interrogation required at least as much protection as the Fifth Amendment right to counsel at any custodial interrogation.
Justice Stevens wrote,
Chief Justice Burger, concurred in the judgment saying that stare decisis
called for "following the rule of Edwards in this context, but plainly the subject calls for reexamination."
. The dissent explained,
, , which held that an accused's invocation of his Sixth Amendment right to counsel during a judicial proceeding does not constitute an invocation of the right to counsel derived by Miranda v. Arizona
, 384 U.S. 436, from the Fifth Amendment's guarantee against compelled self-incrimination. "Therefore, while a defendant who has invoked his Sixth Amendment right to counsel with respect to the offense for which he is being prosecuted may not waive that right, he may waive his Miranda–based right not to be interrogated about unrelated and uncharged offenses." Also the Court held in Michigan v. Harvey, , that evidence acquired in violation of Michigan v. Jackson could be used for impeachment
purposes.
Rudy Bladel was retried, found guilty and sentenced to three concurrent life sentences with no possibility of parole added to the sentence. He died in Jackson, Michigan on November 15, 2006 of thyroid cancer
.
On March 27, 2009, the Supreme Court ordered lawyers in a pending case, Montejo v. Louisiana
, (Docket No.07-1529), to file new briefs on whether the Court should overrule its decision in Michigan v. Jackson. On May 26, 2009 the Supreme Court overruled Michigan v. Jackson through the Court's decision in Montejo v. Louisiana.
Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution
The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights which sets forth rights related to criminal prosecutions...
right to counsel
Right to counsel
Right to counsel is currently generally regarded as a constituent of the right to a fair trial, allowing for the defendant to be assisted by counsel , and if he cannot afford his own lawyer, requiring that the government should appoint one for him/her, or pay his/her legal expenses...
in a police
Police
The police is a personification of the state designated to put in practice the enforced law, protect property and reduce civil disorder in civilian matters. Their powers include the legitimized use of force...
interrogation
Interrogation
Interrogation is interviewing as commonly employed by officers of the police, military, and Intelligence agencies with the goal of extracting a confession or obtaining information. Subjects of interrogation are often the suspects, victims, or witnesses of a crime...
. In a decision written by Justice Stevens, the Court held that once an accused individual has claimed a right to counsel at a plea hearing or other court proceeding, a waiver of that right during later police questioning would be invalid unless the accused individual initiated the communication.
This decision was overruled by the Supreme Court in Montejo v. Louisiana
Montejo v. Louisiana
Montejo v. Louisiana, 556 U.S. ___ , is a 5–4 decision by the United States Supreme Court that overruled the Court's decision in Michigan v. Jackson, . Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court. Justice Alito filed a concurring opinion...
, 556 U.S. ___ (2009), by a 5–4 decision.
Respondent Bladel
RespondentRespondent
A respondent is a person who is called upon to issue a response to a communication made by another. In legal usage, this specifically refers to the defendant in a legal proceeding commenced by a petition, or to an appellee, or the opposing party, in an appeal of a decision by an initial fact-finder...
Rudy Bladel had been convicted of murdering three railroad employees at the Amtrak Station in Jackson, Michigan
Jackson, Michigan
Jackson is a city located along Interstate 94 in the south central area of the U.S. state of Michigan, about west of Ann Arbor and south of Lansing. It is the county seat of Jackson County. As of the 2010 census, the city population was 33,534...
, on December 31, 1978.
Bladel, a disgruntled former employee, had been arrested three months later in Indiana
Indiana
Indiana is a US state, admitted to the United States as the 19th on December 11, 1816. It is located in the Midwestern United States and Great Lakes Region. With 6,483,802 residents, the state is ranked 15th in population and 16th in population density. Indiana is ranked 38th in land area and is...
and extradited to Michigan. He had agreed to talk to the police without counsel. At his arraignment
Arraignment
Arraignment is a formal reading of a criminal complaint in the presence of the defendant to inform the defendant of the charges against him or her. In response to arraignment, the accused is expected to enter a plea...
he requested that counsel be appointed for him because he was indigent. The detective in charge of the investigation was present at the arraignment. A notice of appointment was then mailed to a law firm, but before the law firm received the notice, two police officers interviewed Bladel in the county jail and obtained a confession
Confession
This article is for the religious practice of confessing one's sins.Confession is the acknowledgment of sin or wrongs...
from him. Prior to that questioning, the officers had advised Bladel of his Miranda rights. Although Bladel had inquired about his representation several times since the arraignment, he was not told that a law firm had been appointed to represent him.
Bladel then objected to the admissibility
Admissible evidence
Admissible evidence, in a court of law, is any testimonial, documentary, or tangible evidence that may be introduced to a factfinder—usually a judge or jury—in order to establish or to bolster a point put forth by a party to the proceeding...
of the confession but the trial court overruled his objection. He was convicted and sentenced to three concurrent life sentences. On appeal from his conviction and sentence, Bladel challenged the confession. The Michigan Court of Appeals
Michigan Court of Appeals
The Michigan Court of Appeals is the intermediate-level appellate court of the state of Michigan. It was created by the Michigan Constitution of 1963, and commenced operations in 1965...
first rejected that challenge and affirmed the conviction, but, after reconsideration in the light of a recent decision by the State Supreme Court, it reversed and remanded for a new trial. The Michigan Supreme Court
Michigan Supreme Court
The Michigan Supreme Court is the highest court in the U.S. state of Michigan. It is known as Michigan's "court of last resort" and consists of seven justices who are elected to eight-year terms. Candidates are nominated by political parties and are elected on a nonpartisan ballot...
then granted the prosecutor's application for leave to appeal, and considered the case with respondent Jackson's appeal of his conviction.
Respondent Jackson
Respondent Robert Bernard Jackson had been convicted of second-degree murder and conspiracyConspiracy (crime)
In the criminal law, a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to break the law at some time in the future, and, in some cases, with at least one overt act in furtherance of that agreement...
to commit second-degree murder after allegedly taking part in a wife's plan to have her husband killed on July 12, 1979. He made a number of statements to police after his arrest but before his arraignment. During his arraignment, Jackson requested that counsel be appointed for him.
On the following morning, before he had an opportunity to consult with counsel, two police officers obtained another statement from Jackson to "confirm" that he was the person who had shot the victim. As was true of the prearraignment statements, the questioning was preceded by advice of his Miranda rights and Jackson's agreement to proceed without counsel being present.
The Michigan Court of Appeals held that Jackson's later statement was properly received in evidence. Accordingly, it affirmed Jackson's conviction of murder, although it set aside the conspiracy conviction on unrelated grounds.
The Michigan Supreme Court's decision
The Michigan Supreme Court held that the postarraignment statements in both cases should have been suppressed.The U.S. Supreme Court had held previously in Edwards v. Arizona
Edwards v. Arizona
Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S 477 , is a decision by the United States Supreme Court holding that once a defendant invokes his Fifth Amendment right to counsel police must cease custodial interrogation...
, , that an accused person in custody who has,
"expressed his desire to deal with the police only through counsel is not subject to further interrogation by the authorities until counsel has been made available to him, unless the accused himself initiates further communication, exchanges, or conversations with the police."
The Court of Appeals had distinguished the Edwards rule on the ground that Jackson's request for an attorney had been made at his arraignment, whereas Edwards' request had been made during a custodial interrogation by the police. Noting that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel attached at the time of the arraignments, the Michigan Supreme Court concluded that the Edwards rule,
"applies by analogy to those situations where an accused requests counsel before the arraigning magistrate. Once this request occurs, the police may not conduct further interrogations until counsel has been made available to the accused, unless the accused initiates further communications, exchanges, or conversations with the police. . . . The police cannot simply ignore a defendant's unequivocal request for counsel."
United States Supreme Court decision
The Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari and affirmed the Michigan Supreme Court's decision in a 6 to 3 decision.Majority and concurrence
Justice Stevens wrote for the majority and was joined by Justices BrennanWilliam J. Brennan, Jr.
William Joseph Brennan, Jr. was an American jurist who served as an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court from 1956 to 1990...
, White
Byron White
Byron Raymond "Whizzer" White won fame both as a football halfback and as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Appointed to the court by President John F. Kennedy in 1962, he served until his retirement in 1993...
, Marshall
Thurgood Marshall
Thurgood Marshall was an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court, serving from October 1967 until October 1991...
and Blackmun.
The Court had held previously that the "Sixth Amendment guarantees the accused, at least after the initiation of formal charges, the right to rely on counsel as a 'medium' between him and the State." Maine v. Moulton, at 176. The Court found that therefore, the Sixth Amendment right to counsel at a postarraignment interrogation required at least as much protection as the Fifth Amendment right to counsel at any custodial interrogation.
Justice Stevens wrote,
"'Edwards is grounded in the understanding that "the assertion of the right to counsel [is] a significant event," 451 U.S. at 451 U.S. 485, and that "additional safeguards are necessary when the accused asks for counsel." Id. at 451 U.S. 484. We conclude that the assertion is no less significant, and the need for additional safeguards no less clear, when the request for counsel is made at an arraignment and when the basis for the claim is the Sixth Amendment. We thus hold that, if police initiate interrogation after a defendant's assertion, at an arraignment or similar proceeding, of his right to counsel, any waiver of the defendant's right to counsel for that police-initiated interrogation is invalid. Although the Edwards decision itself rested on the Fifth Amendment and concerned a request for counsel made during custodial interrogation, the Michigan Supreme Court correctly perceived that the reasoning of that case applies with even greater force to these cases.'"
Chief Justice Burger, concurred in the judgment saying that stare decisis
Stare decisis
Stare decisis is a legal principle by which judges are obliged to respect the precedents established by prior decisions...
called for "following the rule of Edwards in this context, but plainly the subject calls for reexamination."
Dissent
Justice Rehnquist wrote a dissenting opinion joined by Justice Powell and Justice O'ConnorSandra Day O'Connor
Sandra Day O'Connor is an American jurist who was the first female member of the Supreme Court of the United States. She served as an Associate Justice from 1981 until her retirement from the Court in 2006. O'Connor was appointed by President Ronald Reagan in 1981...
. The dissent explained,
"Edwards did not confer a substantive constitutional right that had not existed before; it 'created a protective umbrella serving to enhance a constitutional guarantee.'"
"The prophylactic ruleProphylactic ruleA prophylactic rule is a judicially-crafted rule that overprotects a constitutional right, and gives more protection than such right might abstractly seem to require on its face, in order to safeguard that constitutional right or improve detection of violations of that right. An example is the...
of Edwards, designed from its inception to protect a defendant's right under the Fifth Amendment not to be compelled to incriminate himself, simply does not meaningfully apply to the Sixth Amendment.
Aftermath
The holding in Michigan v. Jackson was narrowed later by the Court in McNeil v. WisconsinMcNeil v. Wisconsin
McNeil v. Wisconsin, , held that the right to counsel secured by the Sixth Amendment and the right to counsel protected by Miranda v. Arizona, , are separate and distinct, such that invoking one does not implicitly invoke the other.- Facts :...
, , which held that an accused's invocation of his Sixth Amendment right to counsel during a judicial proceeding does not constitute an invocation of the right to counsel derived by Miranda v. Arizona
Miranda v. Arizona
Miranda v. Arizona, , was a landmark 5–4 decision of the United States Supreme Court. The Court held that both inculpatory and exculpatory statements made in response to interrogation by a defendant in police custody will be admissible at trial only if the prosecution can show that the defendant...
, 384 U.S. 436, from the Fifth Amendment's guarantee against compelled self-incrimination. "Therefore, while a defendant who has invoked his Sixth Amendment right to counsel with respect to the offense for which he is being prosecuted may not waive that right, he may waive his Miranda–based right not to be interrogated about unrelated and uncharged offenses." Also the Court held in Michigan v. Harvey, , that evidence acquired in violation of Michigan v. Jackson could be used for impeachment
Witness impeachment
Witness impeachment, in the law of evidence, is the process of calling into question the credibility of an individual who is testifying in a trial...
purposes.
Rudy Bladel was retried, found guilty and sentenced to three concurrent life sentences with no possibility of parole added to the sentence. He died in Jackson, Michigan on November 15, 2006 of thyroid cancer
Thyroid cancer
Thyroid neoplasm is a neoplasm or tumor of the thyroid. It can be a benign tumor such as thyroid adenoma, or it can be a malignant neoplasm , such as papillary, follicular, medullary or anaplastic thyroid cancer. Most patients are 25 to 65 years of age when first diagnosed; women are more affected...
.
On March 27, 2009, the Supreme Court ordered lawyers in a pending case, Montejo v. Louisiana
Montejo v. Louisiana
Montejo v. Louisiana, 556 U.S. ___ , is a 5–4 decision by the United States Supreme Court that overruled the Court's decision in Michigan v. Jackson, . Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court. Justice Alito filed a concurring opinion...
, (Docket No.07-1529), to file new briefs on whether the Court should overrule its decision in Michigan v. Jackson. On May 26, 2009 the Supreme Court overruled Michigan v. Jackson through the Court's decision in Montejo v. Louisiana.