What Is Necessary to Prove a Waiver of the Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel?
Officers are generally familiar with Miranda warning and waiver forms and procedures. Until 1988, however, the Supreme Court had not furnished any significant guidance regarding the requirements for a valid waiver of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Lower courts had been divided on the subject, but the United States Supreme Court decision in Patterson v. Illinois6 cleared the air, holding that a standard Miranda-style waiver procedure is sufficient to produce a valid waiver of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, at least if the suspect is also advised that he has been formally charged with the specific crime that police wish to discuss. Summary The law regarding attachment, waiver, and assertion of interrogation rights is evolving, growing, and sometimes confusing. More than one right may be in play at any given time. The suspect’s rights, and rules concerning them, may come and go as conditions change during investigation and prosecution. Without close attention to these develo
Related Questions
- Rights of publicity for the actorsQuestion: Is sexually explicit Fan Fiction protected by the First Amendment right to free speech?
- Does Denial of Counsel of Choice Result in a Sixth Amendment Violation Requiring Automatic Reversal?
- What Is Necessary to Prove a Waiver of the Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel?
