Citation network
Montejo Vs. Louisiana
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 26, 2009
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
Syllabus October Term, 2008 Montejo V. LouisianaSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
and the court ordered the appointment of counsel. Later that day, the police read Montejo his rights under Miranda v. ArizonaSearch
-
the State Supreme Court rejected his claim that the letter should have been suppressed under the rule of Michigan v. JacksonSearch
-
Michigan v. JacksonSearch
-
of Jackson, whose presumption was created by analogy to a similar prophylactic rule established in Edwards v. ArizonaSearch
-
is a traditional ground for overruling it. Payne v. TennesseeSearch
-
s antiquity, the reliance interests at stake, and whether the decision was well reasoned. Pearson v. CallahanSearch
-
interrogation must stop. 451 U. S., at 484. And under Minnick v. MississippiSearch
-
JJ., joined, and in which Breyer, J., joined, except for n. 5. Breyer, J., filed a dissenting opinion. Montejo v. LouisianaSearch
-
Opinion of the Court Montejo V. LouisianaSearch
-
Supreme Court of the United States No. 07-1529 Jesse Jay Montejo, Petitioner V. LouisianaSearch
-
We consider in this case the scope and continued viability of the rule announced by this Court in Michigan v. JacksonSearch
-
Police sought to question Montejo, who was a known associate of Moore. Montejo waived his rights under Miranda v. ArizonaSearch
-
U. S., at 636. Citing a decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, Montoya v. CollinsSearch
-
s decision in Michigan v. JacksonSearch
-
An indigent defendant has no right to choose his counsel, United States v. Gonzalez-LopezSearch
-
are crucial in rules that govern law enforcement, Minnick v. MississippiSearch
-
U. S. 146 , 151 (1990), this would be an unfortunate way to proceed. See also Moran v. BurbineSearch
-
stages of the criminal proceedings. United States v. WadeSearch
-
U. S. 45 , 57 (1932). Interrogation by the State is such a stage. Massiah v. UnitedSearch
-
see also United States v. HenrySearch
-
may be waived by a defendant, so long as relinquishment of the right is voluntary, knowing, and intelligent. Patterson v. IllinoisSearch
-
the decision to waive need not itself be counseled. Michigan v. HarveySearch
-
protect the Fifth Amendment based Miranda right to have counsel present at any custodial interrogation. Edwards v. ArizonaSearch
-
Adams v. UnitedSearch
-
not the validity of a Sixth Amendment waiver. See Maine v. MoultonSearch
-
U. S. 808 , 827 (1991). Accordingly, we called for supplemental briefing addressed to the question whether Michigan v. JacksonSearch
-
of the precedent, the reliance interests at stake, and of course whether the decision was well reasoned. Pearson v. CallahanSearch
-
Herring v. UnitedSearch
-
U. S. 675 , 682 (1988). Our cases make clear which sorts of statements trigger its protections, see Davis v. UnitedSearch
-
n. 6 (1984). Michigan v. JacksonSearch
-
should be and now is overruled. v. AlthoughSearch
-
Douglas v. CitySearch
-
of Jeannette , 319 U. S. 157 , 181 (1943) (opinion concurring in result). We today remove Michigan v. JacksonSearch
-
Patterson , 487 U. S., at 290, n. 3. To support that proposition, the Court cited Maine v. MoultonSearch
-
in both these scenarios (having a lawyer, v. requestingSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial