When a defendant makes an unequivocal request for an attorney.
All questioning of the defendant must stop.
Click on the case titles to link to the full case decision.
Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963)-Florida law only provided counsel for indigent defendants in capital cases. The USSC ruled that an indigent defendant has a right to court appointed counsel in non-capital cases as well as capital cases.
Gilbert v. California, 388 U.S. 263 (1967)-This case deals with handwriting exemplars. The court ruled that:
Handwriting exemplars are identifying physical characteristics outside the protection of self-incrimination.
The taking of handwriting exemplars is not a "critical" stage of the criminal proceedings. Therefore, the defendant is not entitled to counsel.
United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218 (1967)-A suspect that is represented by an attorney can be compelled to participate in a line-up without the attorney present. The suspect can also be asked to recite lines in order to identify his voice.
United States v. Ash, 413 U.S. 300 (1973)-The Sixth Amendment does not grant an accused the right to have counsel present when the Government conducts a post-indictment photographic display, containing a picture of the accused, for the purpose of allowing a witness to attempt an identification of the offender.
Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 (1981)-"An accused having expressed his desire to deal with the police only through counsel, is not subject to further interrogation until counsel has been made available to him, unless the accused has himself initiated further communication, exchanges, or conversations with the police."
Minnick v. Mississippi, 498 US 146 (1990)-Once a custodial suspect requests counsel in response to the Miranda warnings, the officers cannot attempt to reinterrogate the suspect without counsel. In this case, federal officers interrogated the suspect after advising him of his rights. He requested counsel. A couple of days later a deputy sheriff read the suspect his rights again and questioned him without his attorney. The suspect confessed. The confession was excluded because the suspect requested counsel during the first interrogation.
Davis v. United States, 512 US 452 (1994)-A suspect must make an unequivocal request for a lawyer in order to effectively invoke his right to counsel.
Texas v. Cobb, 532 U.S. 162 (2001)-Held: Because the Sixth Amendment right to counsel is "offense specific," it does not necessarily extend to offenses that are "factually related" to those that have actually been charged. Cobb burglarized a home. He then committed two murders to conceal the burglary. He was charged with the burglary and obtained counsel. He was later Mirandized and questioned about the murders for which he had not been charged. Although the crimes were related, they are separate crimes. The confession to the murders was properly obtained.