1) John Doe goes to the police station to retrieve his car that had been impounded. At the station, officers read him his Miranda warnings ask him if they can talk to him about a murder they are investigating. Doe says he doesn’t want to speak with them without his lawyer. No questions are asked and he leaves.
A few days later, the police arrest John Doe for forging the murder victimâs name when cashing a check made out to the victim. After his arrest, officers consciously decide not to advise Doe of his Miranda warnings and question him regarding the forgery and any knowledge he has about the victimâs whereabouts? Doe says he had nothing to do with the victimâs disappearance and when the interrogation ends is taken to jail on the forgery charge.
Four hours later, after additional information comes to the officersâ attention, he is brought back to the station and at that point indicates he has talked to his lawyer and wants to tell the officers what happened. He is advised of his Miranda warnings and signs a waiver of those rights and then confesses. Should the Court suppress his confession? Why or why not?
2) Officers go visit John Doe who is serving a prison sentence for a past offense. Doe is escorted from his prison cell by a corrections officer to a conference room where the officers, who are armed, question him about an offense allegedly committed prior to his incarceration. He is not advised of his rights and the officers question him for at least five hours. During that time, officers tell him several times he is free to leave and can return to his cell and he is not restrained by handcuffs or in any other way within the conference room. Although Doe tells the officers several times he does not wish to talk to them anymore, he never asks to go back to his cell. Eventually, he confesses. Should the Court suppress his confession? Why or why not?