Court Brief 3

Court Brief for Moran v. Burbine, 475 U.S. 412 (1986), O’Connor J. No: Court Brief for Moran v. Burbine, 475 U.S. 412 (1986), O’Connor J.
Introduction
The Supreme Court of Rhode Island convicted Brian Burbine of 1st degree murder, reaffirmed the decision of jury, and rejected Brian’s claim that as per Fifth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, his signed confessions in the form of waivers should be suppressed. This paper will use IRAC method for briefing the case.
Issue
The issue highlighted in the case Moran v. Burbine is violation of Fifth and Fourth Amendment by the police officials who interrogated and attained three valid waivers of confession of murder. Whether the pre-arraignment confession of Burbine’s crime in form of valid waivers be suppressed because of police’s failure to report the suspect of attorney’s attempt to reach him or was he adequately informed of his right to access a lawyer?
Rule
The Providence Police informed Burbine of his Miranda Rights according to which, he could ask for an attorney’s presence “to dissipate the compulsion inherent in custodial interrogation and, in so doing, guard against abridgement of the suspect’s Fifth Amendment Rights”. In three sessions, the police informed him of his Miranda rights and he signed a written form acknowledging, “he [did] not want an attorney called or appointed for [him]” due to which, the court ruled out that he "knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his privilege against self-incrimination [and] his right to counsel." So, his conviction was retained.
Analysis
Brian Burbine was arrested along with two others with charge of local burglary. Before the arrest, Detective Ferranti found out through a confidential report that Burbine who was known with the name Butch murdered Ms. Hickey brutally some months ago. She was left unconscious and wounded in a factory parking lot after which, she was sent to the hospital where she died after three weeks because of her wounds. The Detective informed Burbine about his Miranda rights, but he was not ready to sign a written waiver. However, the detective called police assistance after which, three police officers reached for interrogating the suspect. Burbine’s sister tried to gain access to attorney’s assistance for the burglary case against his brother and Ms. Munson was asked for assistance. When Ms. Munson called the police station, she was told that they had Burbine in custody, but she was also assured that he would not be interrogated till morning. However, the officers were already busy in interrogating Burbine after which, they received three waivers with his confession of murder.
The police officials informed him three times about his Miranda rights, but he negated to get any attorney’s help. He was not aware that his sister was busy in arranging some legal assistance for him, but he himself signed three waivers acknowledging his guilt. When he was trailed, he appealed for the suppression of the three waivers because he was denied his rights as per Fifth Amendment and Fourteen Amendment of the Constitution. However, the court decided against him because according to the court, he "knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his privilege against self-incrimination [and] his right to counsel." The cases applicable here are Miranda v. Arizona (1966) and State v. Burbine (1982).
Conclusion
The Supreme Court of Rhode Island decided that Burbine was adequately informed about his right to access to a lawyer, but he willfully and knowingly signed the waivers showing his consent for no legal assistance at that juncture. Therefore, his appeal for suppression of valid waivers against his denial of constitutional rights was rejected.
References
Lippman, M. (2014).&nbsp.Criminal procedure. 2nd Ed. Thousand Oaks California: SAGE Publications.