Last month, the Supreme Court expressed interest in re-examining Michigan v. Jackson, a major 1986 precedent aimed at protecting a suspect’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel. On Monday, the Court indicated it wants to rule on the issue without hearing oral argument.
The Court on March 27 had asked for briefing on whether Michigan v. Jackson should be overturned, in the context of Montejo v. Louisiana, a case that had already been argued in January. It’s rare but not unprecedented for the Court to ask for supplemental briefing on a related issue in a pending case. In Montejo, the question is whether a suspect must take affirmative steps to accept an appointed counsel to keep police from conducting interrogation. The Michigan v. Jackson precedent said a defendant’s waiver of the right to counsel could not be found valid if police initiate questioning after the defendant has requested counsel.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
