Questioning a Suspect on a Separate, Uncharged Crime

"FROM THE CLASSROOM"
By Ray Hill, Professor Emeritus, Santa Rosa Junior College

“Its ‘402’ time, officer” - “Who Wins, You or Defense counsel”    Note: 402(b) E.C. – A pre-trial court hearing to determine the admissibility of an admission or confession.
 

Questioning a Suspect on a Separate, Uncharged Crime

This is the fourth in a series of mini-articles covering basic Miranda and Confession Law. This review is equally applicable to detectives and those generalists who are assigned to investigate their own cases. The question for this article is:

A robbery suspect has been arraigned and appointed counsel on two residential robbery charges from Jurisdiction #1. A detective from Jurisdiction #2 desires to question the same suspect on a separate and uncharged residential 211 P.C. occurring in her city. The detective goes to the jail, and after a Miranda waiver is secured, interviews the suspect. He admits to having been at the crime scene, but did not possess the weapon or pistol whip the victim.

Later at a “402 Motion”, defense counsel objects to the introduction of these statements on the grounds that once an attorney has been appointed for the defendant, his Sixth Amendment right to counsel precludes in-custody, police initiated questioning unless counsel is present.

The statement should be? ADMISSIBLE or INADMISSIBLE

Clearly admissible. First some background: 

The Sixth Amendment provides “in all criminal proceedings, the accused shall enjoy the right to have the assistance of counsel for his defense”. The Sixth Amendment triggers at or after the time that judicial proceedings have been initiated whether by way of formal charge, indictment, information, or arraignment. Once the defendant has been charged or ....

© 2026 Legal Updates, LLC.
This content is protected by copyright law. Republishing or redistribution in any form without written permission is strictly prohibited. For licensing or reprint requests, contact support@legalupdates.com.