Case ID: mich-app_30/html/0196-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

PEOPLE v. CRUTHIRD
    Criminal Law — Warning of Rights — Right to Terminate Interrogation.
    An accused person does not have to be advised that police interrogation will cease at his request; it is necessary only that police interrogation cease whenever he indicates his desire to remain silent.
    Appeal from Allegan, Chester A. Ray, J.
    Submitted Division 3 January 6, 1971, at Grand Rapids.
    (Docket No. 8523.)
    Decided January 27, 1971.
    Howard Cruthird was convicted of manslaughter. Defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    
      Roper, Meyers & Hann, for defendant on appeal.
    Before: Holbrook, P. J., and McGregor and T. M. Burns, JJ.
    References por Points in Headnote
    29 Am Jur 2d, Evidence § § 555-557.
    Necessity of informing suspect of rights under privilege against self-incrimination, prior to police interrogation. 10 ALR3d 1054.
   Per Curiam.

Defendant, prior to trial, made two confessions, one of which was reduced to writing. Prior to these confessions, lie was advised of his right to remain silent, that anything he said “can and will be used against him”, and his other Miranda rights. Miranda v. Arizona (1966), 384 US 436 (86 S Ct 1602, 16 L Ed 2d 694, 10 ALR3d 974). Defendant asserts that he was not advised that he conld terminate any interrogation at any time and contends that the failure to so advise him precludes the admission of his statements at trial, citing People v. Jourdan (1968), 14 Mich App 743.

This Court, in People v. Tubbs (1970), 22 Mich App 549, held that the ruling in Jourdan, supra, that Miranda required that a defendant be advised that interrogation would cease at his request, was dictum. The Tubbs court further held that Miranda requires only that interrogation cease whenever an individual indicates his desire to remain silent, but does not require that an individual be advised that interrogation will cease at his request. This being the only attack upon the admissibility of the confession, the trial court properly allowed it into evidence.

Affirmed.