Document: 465 U.S. 638 104 S.Ct. 1338 79 L.Ed.2d 579 Herman SOLEM, Warden, Petitionerv.Norman STUMES. No. 81-2149. Argued Nov. 28, 1983. Decided Feb. 29, 1984. Syllabus Respondent, a homicide suspect, when arrested on unrelated charges, made incriminating statements to the police about after had twice renewed interrogation despite respondent's having invoked his right counsel. Respondent was charged with murder and, South Dakota trial court refused suppress police, convicted of first-degree manslaughter. The Supreme Court affirmed. then filed petition for writ habeas corpus in Federal District Court, which denied writ. While appeal pending, this Edwards v. Arizona, 451 477, 101 1880, 68 378, held that once suspect has counsel, any subsequent conversation must be initiated by him. Applying case, Appeals found acted unconstitutionally. Held: should not applied retroactively, and therefore erred evaluating constitutionality conduct case under standards set out Edwards. Pp. 642-651. (a) criteria guiding resolution whether new constitutional decision retroactively implicate (1) purpose served standards, (2) extent law enforcement authorities relied old (3) effect administration justice retroactive application standards. 642-643. (b) Complete is most appropriate where principle designed enhance accuracy criminal trials. little do truthfinding function trial. fact requested lawyer does mean he makes response questioning are likely inaccurate. Moreover, those situations raises significant doubt as voluntariness reliability therefore, outcome at trial, it suppression could achieved without reliance prophylactic rule adopted 643-645. (c) It would unreasonable expect have conducted themselves accordance Edwards' bright-line prior its announcement. did overrule or transform standard practice, but establish test waiver counsel acceptable right. cannot said been "clearly" "distinctly" foreshadowed. 645-650. (d) disruptive justice. In number cases, an inquiry, hampered problems lost evidence, faulty memory, missing witnesses, required assess substantiality claim. P. 650. 671 F.2d 1150 (8th Cir.1982), reversed remanded. Mark V. Meierhenry, Atty. Gen., Pierre, S.D., petitioner. Timothy J. McGreevy, Sioux Falls, respondent. Justice WHITE delivered opinion Court. 1 question 378 (1981), retroactively. 2 * Norman Stumes, death Joyce Hoff Dakota. On September 27, 1973, Stumes Green Bay, Wisconsin, pending perjury felony check charges. He yet Hoff's death. following morning spoke phone attorney who told him make before returning Three Falls officers, Skadsen, Green, Hendrick, went Bay bring back. They first November 1. After being read Miranda rights, understood them object speaking present. hour half homicide, asked if willing take lie detector test. answered "that I'd rather answer until I talk [my attorney]." At point officers stopped questioning. 3 returned afternoon recommenced giving warnings. admitted apartment night killing they intercourse, anything her When intentional accidental, accidental. stated "I more time my attorney, I'll give you full statement regards death." Questioning thereupon ceased. 4 next three out, car, 500-mile trip Falls. given warnings beginning trip, talk. shrugged nodded affirmatively, there some further For matters, though occasionally subject came up. Late afternoon, 10- 15-minute silence respondent what referred "a conflict emotions" "made couldn't understand why anybody want kill taking human life so useless." feel better "got off chest." recounted striking strangling she tell someone slept together. reached noting undoubtedly advise to. agreed statement, stating don't damn says. I'm doing like, to." 6:45 evening. Shortly placed cell, called asking "tell didn't her, accident—that vicious killer." 5 murder; police; jury guilty manslaughter sentenced imprisonment. direct appeal, State remanded determination Stumes' voluntary. had; conviction accordingly "automatically affirmed." 6 United States evidentiary hearing, 511 F.Supp. 1312. concluded knowingly, intelligently, voluntarily waived require all cease forever Given totality circumstances, during proper.1 7 we supra. Eighth Circuit unconstitutionally renewing counsel.2 8 Petitioner sought certiorari questions: violated Edwards, adequately deferred state court's fact-finding, We granted only third. --- ----, 103 3568, 77 1409 (1983). assume present purposes issue here need decide also 384 436, 86 1602, 16 694 (1966), considered Appeals. Because conclude applying reverse remand reconsideration pre-Edwards law. II 9 As rule, judicial decisions apply "retroactively." Robinson Neil, 409 505, 507-508, 93 876, 877-878, 35 29 (1973). Indeed, legal system based precedent built-in presumption retroactivity. Nonetheless, compelled, constitutionally otherwise. Great Northern R. Co. Sunburst Oil & Refining Co., 287 358, 364, 53 145, 148, L.Ed. 360 (1932). Since Linkletter Walker, 381 618, 85 1731, 14 601 (1965), Mapp Ohio, 367 643, 81 1684, 1081 (1961), defendants whose convictions were final decided, recognized "the interest justice" exigencies situation" may argue against imposing U.S., 628, S.Ct., 1737. basic principles retroactivity cases established supra, Tehan Shott, 382 406, 459, 15 453 Johnson New Jersey, 719, 1772, 882 (1966). Under these 10 "[t]he [retroactivity] standards." Stovall Denno, 388 293, 297, 87 1967, 1970, 18 1199 (1967).3 11 Examining light factors, A. 12 See Williams States, 401 646, 653 n. 6, 91 1148, 1152 28 (1971) (plurality opinion) (citing cases). tangential relation noted past, procedure fact-finding process necessarily matter degree." 728-729, 1778-1779. exclusionary pursuant perhaps entirely result Fourth Amendment context. Peltier, 422 531, 95 2313, 45 374 (1975); Desist 394 244, 89 1030, 22 248 (1969). Yet sine qua non fair accurate interrogation. faced similar situation newly lineups There although excluding identifications absence "justified assure integrity our justice, [it] will affect no unfairness present." 299, 1971. same true rule. Most important, Edwards.4 13 frequently bore least heavily function. notable itself, trials place decided. supra.5 generally 655 7, 1153 7. far cry from sort goes heart function, consistently retroactive. E.g., Brown Louisiana, 447 323, 100 2214, 65 159 (1980); Hankerson North Carolina, 432 233, 97 2339, 306 (1977); Arsenault Massachusetts, 393 5, 35, 21 (1968). Rather, implement pre-existing rights. This such Michigan Payne, 412 47, 1966, 36 736 (1973); Halliday 831, 1498, 23 (1969) (per curiam ); B considering factor, Court's looked primarily courts justifiably different announced issue. Unjustified "reliance" bar inquiry often phrased terms foreshadowed earlier "clear break past."6 explicitly overruled past precedent, disapproved practice sanctioned overturned longstanding approved near-unanimous lower-court authority, factors "have virtually compelled finding nonretroactivity." Johnson, 457 537, 549-550, 102 2579, 2587-2588, 73 202 (1982). id., 551-552, 2588-2589. less inclined limit "distinctly foreshadowed." 336, 2224, (1980). just predictability local expected anticipate future unclear, however. safeguard substantive requirement. Before presence lawyer, waive counsel: initiate communication. Prior "strongly indicated additional safeguards necessary accused asks counsel," 484, 1884, several times accused's free see 485, 1885. practice. Thus, break" almost automatically nonretroactive. nonetheless think can faulted per se approach. Cf. Adams Illinois, 405 278, 283, 92 916, 31 (1972) opinion). emphasis whether, individual, case-by-case matter, knowing, voluntary, intelligent. Zerbst, 304 458, 464, 58 1019, 1023, 82 1461 (1938). Carolina Butler, 441 369, 374-375, 99 1755, 1757-1759, 60 286 (1979), relying treating Fifth fortiori, "[e]ven fundamental involved, determined 'the particular facts circumstances surrounding including background, experience, accused." saw "no reason discard replace inflexible rule." Id., 375, 1758. Fare Michael C., 442 707, 724-725, 2560, 2571-2572, 61 197 (1979). majority viewed controlled 475, 1628, taken task view one dissenters, 513-514, 1648-1649 (Harlan, J., dissenting). Tague 444 469, 470-471, 652, 653, 62 622 Tucker, 417 433, 444, 94 2357, 2364, 41 182 (1974).7 way cast legitimacy necessity acknowledge intelligent even occurred adopt rules governing Mosley, 423 96, 96 321, 46 313 590, 603-604, 2254, 2261-2262, 416 (1975). And, while Mosley distinguish silence, 10, 326 much logic language invocation former. consequence Miranda. Thus believed voluntary conversation. 17 lower bears reality. 56, resume defendant acknowledged unsettled. Hernandez, 574 1362, 1370, (CA5 1978); Herman, 544 791, 796 1977). Some prohibited resumption unless suspect. Womack, 542 1047, 1050-1051 (CA9 1976); Priest, 491, 493 1969). other hand, allowed interrogations request Blasingame Estelle, 604 893 1979); White Finkbeiner, 611 186, 191 (CA7 1979), vacated, 1013, 3000, 69 385 (1981); Rodriguez-Gastelum, 569 482, 488 (CA9) (en banc), cert. denied, 436 919, 98 2266, 56 760 (1978); Hill Whealon, 490 629 (CA6 1974). Clark, 499 802, 807 (CA4 1974).8 declined measure prospectivity date Escobedo 478, 84 1758, 977 (1964), because "fully anticipated" "clearly foreshadowed" decision. 734, 1781. "The disagreements among concerning implications Escobedo, however, impelled us lay down guidelines presented case. done available persons begun" Id. argues which, courts, laid implementation 19 short, 920. 2224. consider compelling, specific C 20 guess might difference admissibility surely significant. those, That investigation, possible retrial, witnesses. Jenkins Delaware, 395 213, 220-220, 1677, 1681-1681, 253 D sum, rights protect still claimed preceded bright line announcement; disrupt Weighing considerations, IV minimum, nonretroactivity means collateral review convictions. Edwards.9 Our drawn variety places. established, (1982); begun point, (1966); DeStefano Woods, 392 631, 88 2093, 1308 (1968), law-changing handed down, (1969); (1967), prosecution introduce (newly) illegal evidence nonretroactive decision, Fuller Alaska, 80, 61, 212 Just decided today. V express Circuit, determination. 24 Reversed 25 POWELL, concurring judgment. 26 custodial involuntary subjected uncertain merely intended (1938), waivers effective "an relinquishment abandonment known privilege," reference [each] 1884. Alternatively, interpreted establishing that, invoked, right, however Zerbst standard, never valid 488-490, 1886-1888 (Justice result). Confusion proper interpretation persisted cases. e.g., Oregon Bradshaw, 462 2830, (1983); ---- 1, 2836 judgment) now states clearly, part supra.1 Ante, 1343-1344. 27 acknowledgement suffices, view, resolve posed previously urged Harlan's suggestion announced.2 246-248, 2346-2348, (1977) (concurring judgment). Harlan reasoned Mackey 667, 675-695, 1160, 1164-1181, 404 dissenting part), approach follows directly conception scope corpus, contrasted review. A brief reasons relevant explain join opinion. Retroactive unnecessary advance regime permits federal vacate properly preserved ground error. Review determine rests upon correct "forc[e] appellate . toe mark."3 687, 1177. Nor fairness complete retroactivity, except rare instances.4 relief habeas, particularly difficult justify costs These insubstantial. include burden prosecutorial resources entailed retrial" miscarriage occurs offender retrial impossible years offense." 247, 2347. frustrates state's careful adherence governed prisoner's conviction. imposed thus outweigh benefits application. Linkletter/Stovall guide balancing accrue 30 Certainly fairness. states, "[I]n Edwards." 644. reasons, concur 32 STEVENS, whom BRENNAN MARSHALL join, dissenting. 33 lawbreaker. His confession, together guilt, brands such. Whether incarceration dozen adequate insufficient punishment crime concern What is—or be—of lawbreakers. 34 custody, assistance interrogated two separate occasions. unlawful. dispute violated.1 Nevertheless, unlawful took May 18, 1981, holds admissible inadmissible 1981. reaching result, "shall retroactively," ante, 639, answers negative "new 647. rule" announces today, than well settled long interrogate prisoner lawyer. real "retroactivity" question. does, raise serious use power create 1966 "secure scrupulous observance traditional principle, quoted rarely heeded degree, suffer deluded instrument own conviction.' " 730, 1779, Specifically, individual warned remain silent, questioning, appointed represent charge afford one. 467-473, 1624-1627. requests "such affirmatively secures one" 470, 1625 (emphasis supplied). "If, indicates manner stage wishes consult questioning." 444-445, 1612-1613 elaborated: 37 "Once given, clear. If manner, cease. shown intends exercise privilege; person invokes privilege product compulsion, subtle Without cut setting in-custody operates overcome choice producing invoked. wants time, opportunity confer obtain respect silent. 38 mean, suggested, each station 'station house lawyer' prisoners. propose entitled one, provided provide reasonable period investigation field carried refrain violating time." 473-474, 1627-1628 supplied) (footnote omitted). 39 clear mandatory. "must respect" individual's permitted interrogation; forbids ask since "there Here questioned anyway, affording opportunity. simply nothing gave slightest believe permissible.2 40 Even impose absolute obligation (1975), silent scrupulously honored. However, expressly distinguished assertion 101, 325, explained distinction itself: asserts requirement desire resumed But clearly requirement, between procedural triggered directed present' '[i]f attorney.' 104, 326, (citations omitted).3 42 Similarly, observed created "per se" provided. 717-719, 2567-2569.4 43 itself demonstrates error conclusion reaches acknowledging aspect Miranda,5 how holding derived Miranda: 44 "Miranda event exercised accused, present.' 474 [86 1628]. later abandoned view. wanted 10; 109-111, 329-330 (WHITE, concurring). C, 2569, Miranda's 'rigid requiring cease.' And last Term, custody again 'undisputed right' 'until consulted lawyer.' Rhode Island Innis, 446 291, 298, 1682, 1688, 64 297 reconfirm views lend substance, emphasize inconsistent progeny authorities, their instance, reinterrogate asserted counsel." 484-485, 1884-1885 supplied).6 perfectly reconfirmed ever find merit reasoning. departments failed heed plain certainly justification reconfirmation regarded analysis today's merits scrutiny. attempt define gives rise question, assumes Its reasoning implicit, discussion calls "reliance factor"—the authorities' "prior failing permit evaluation suspect's speak right.7 concludes announcing "unsettled," cites disagreed 648-649. 47 defining completely unprecedented. concedes 646-647, change normally raised. example, (1969), wrote: "However Katz [v. 389 347, 507, 576 (1967) ] foreshadowed, limited future." 248, 1033.8 position ultimately rejected accepted sufficient demonstrate created. Estate Donnelly, 397 286, 295, 90 1033, 1038, 312 (1970). Until today arises squarely point. Henderson Morgan, 426 637, 651-652, 2253, 2260-2261, 49 108 (1976) amply demonstrated host condemned practices issue.9 48 curious character illustrated Hanover Shoe, Inc. Shoe Machinery Corp., 481, 1231 endorsement antitrust followed Second constituted promulgation purposes. not: "Like Appeals, relies conclusions existing authorities. Sherman Act conditioned monopolization § showing predatory monopolist. neither abrupt shift doctrine constitute replaced Whatever development brought great extension doctrines growing developing over years. sharp avulsive caused current thereafter flow banks. say potential justified thinking acts conducive creation maintenance monopoly, avoided exclusion competitors acts." 497-499, 2233-2235 (footnotes omitted).10 50 majority's description appears recognize, modest doctrine. Shoe. Less ago Payton York, 445 573, 1371, 63 639 (1980) prohibits warrantless arrests homes announcement "new" 51 "Payton announce unanticipated general, subsequently work 'sharp web law,' ruling 'such older one.' Such overrules disapproves arguably overturns widespread spoken, body authority approved." 551, 2588, (1982) 52 Government argued "unsettled" ruling, 559, 2592, "[T]he Government's [position] reduce 'retroactivity test' absurdity. rulings worthy arresting seen above, involving simple clear, all. Literally read, theory eliminate consideration application." 560, 2593. 54 Of course, law, good reason. immunize scrutiny whenever debatable; incentive comply plainest wisely rule.11 purport endorse import holding, already if, suggests, qualify "retroactive" involve indicated," 647 (quoting 1884), is. 55 points reality "settled" arise.12 Respect orderly faithful recent evidenced especially inasmuch Johnson's expressed order 542-548, 2583-2587. III understandably concerned private breakers. not, divert attention overriding importance strict obedience officials entrusted enforcement—and, indeed, interpretation. kind corrosive society dedicated is, all, profound wisdom Brandeis' observation: 57 "Decency, security liberty alike demand government shall commands citizen. laws, existence imperilled fails observe scrupulously. potent, omnipresent teacher. ill, teaches whole people example. Crime contagious. becomes lawbreaker, breeds contempt law; invites every man become unto himself; anarchy. To declare end justifies means—to commit crimes secure criminal—would terrible retribution. Against pernicious resolutely face." Olmstead 277 438, 564, 575, 72 944 (1928) (dissenting respectfully dissent. unconstitutional. informed ceased session unconstitutional reinform admitting harmless beyond doubt. thought agreement waiver. comment useless initiation intermittently throughout actual prompted officer's invitation "get Finally, Skadsen jail tainted previous, obtained, statements. One judge dissented communication recently slightly area. construing past" down. note limits holding: "First, precedents. Second, review, address reach issues attack. Third, provision Amendment." 562, 2594 citation limitations inapplicable Amendment. Like, Pearce, 711, 2072, 656 existed before; "created protective umbrella serving guarantee." 54, "foundational" was, remains, continued rest Ibid. Much Jersey applies equally case: prime [Escobedo (1964) guarantee effectuation self-incrimination, mainstay adversary responds understanding consequences relinquishing it. [W]hile guard possibility unreliable instance interrogation, encompass danger overt obvious coercion. "At coerced confessions completed, providing course prerequisites attack met. Prisoners invoke voluntariness. important preclude completed invoking involuntariness claim." 729-730, 222, both. much-criticised retrospective, stated: decisions. dissent insisted Katz. "Katz responsible 944]. left physical-trespass lifeless awaiting certificate it." 275, 1051 (Fortas, indicate rely caselaw, whatever disrepute. STEVENS "in specifically into opting eschewed inquiry." Post, 661, very quotation demonstrates, extended now-famous regardless circumstances. regard 475-476, 1628-1629. awaited excluded obtained post, 663, 9. one-sided implies, Among upholding reinterrogation Ladd State, 568 P.2d 960, 966, (Alaska 1977), 435 928, 524 Greenawalt, 128 Ariz. 150, 158-160, 624 828, 836-838, 434 882, 70 359 A.2d 600, 601-602 (DC App.1976); Stone, 989, 994-995 (Me.1979); Greene, N.M. 207, 212-213, 572 935, 940-941 Commonwealth Jefferson, Pa. 5-6, 281 852, 866 (1971); Sweiberg S.W.2d (Tex.Cr.App.1974) (and cited); Nash 477 557, 560-563 (Tex.Cr.App.1972), 887, 191, 144 (1972); Pierce, Wash.2d 345, 350-352, 618 62, 65-66 (remanding fact-finding). Wyrick Fields, 556, 78 728 (1983) ), action, nor to, merits. (1983), occurring involved nine months suppressed. misread considered. judgment, intent Zerbst. 491-492, 1880-1889. reiterated Constitution requires purely factual occurs. 2838. contrasting opinions REHNQUIST Bradshaw illustrate, confuse clarify. 2836, 2837 (POWELL, now, accept binding authority. (1982), announced. Although seem desirable perpetually revise evolving doctrine, fundamentally odds process, turn ought incarcerated treated convicted. otherwise, worth enforcing, definitive questions litigants else provides all." 690-691, 1178-1179 Schneckloth Bustamonte, 218, 262, 2041, 2065, 854 (1973) ensure fairness, Gideon Wainwright, 372 335, 83 792, 799 (1963), immune punishment, Roe Wade, 410 113, 705, 147 Releasing prisoners unfair procedures, committed punishable offense fully accord plainly unjust. 692-693, 1179-1180. grant "should retroactively" 642. Therefore, here, given. omission claim led understandable; language. added: expression keep lines open chosen instead advice thereto. More competent deal advice, authorites' insistence counsel's skepticism." 110, 2, 329, 2. unique role plays country. minor adult stands looks protector dealings courts. reason, fashioned rigid cease." 2569. "In Fourteenth Amendments' prohibition self-incrimination putative attorney. 479, 1630. procedures 474, 1628. declared Here, critical Arizona January 19, furnishing confront meeting secured oral admissions." 481-482, 1883-1884. contains innovation, favorable police. mandatory, indicating conferred extend latter: concluding fruits used hold imply powerless countermand election access Had 20, Amendments prohibit listening volunteered using identified Absent infringement occasion waiver." 485-486, 1885-1886. reading "prior" supporting first, (1975) opposite direction, I, demonstrates. second hence places gloss Sixth Amendment, policies underlying quite distinct, pointed rejecting contexts vice versa. Estelle Smith, 454, 14, 1866, 1877, Henry, 264, 272, 273-274, 11, 2183, 2187, 2188-2189, 115 300, 4, 1689, 223-227, 1926, 1930-1932, 1149 (1967). third, Cardina —there Miranda, inquiry: expedient warning availability simple, pause inquire aware Assessments knowledge possessed, information age, education, intelligence, contact speculation; clearcut fact. background interrogated, indispensable pressures insure knows 468-469, 1624-1625 335-336, 2223-2224, opinion); 55, Chevron Huson, 97, 106, 349, 355, 296 731, fact, relies, 649, condemn past. unanimously upheld 299-300, 1971-1972. See, Thompson 768 (5th Cir.1979); Massey, 550 307-308 Cir.1977); (9th Cir.1976); (4th Cir.1974); Crisp, 354, 357 (7th Cir.1970); 491 Cir.1969); Moore 261 Ark. 274, 551 185, 187 Webb 258 95, 522 406 Davis 243 157, 419 125 (1967); People Brake, Colo. 390, 397-399, 553 763, 770 (1976); Harris, 234, 552 Salazar, 189 429, 433-434, 541 676, 680 Medina, 71 Ill.2d 254, 260-261, Ill.Dec. 447, 449, 375 N.E.2d 78, 80 Cook, Ill.App.3d 695, 697-698, 933, 439, (1979); Stevens 265 Ind. 396, 404, 354 727, 733 Pirtle 263 16, 23-25, 323 634, 637-639 Boone, 220 Kan. 758, 767-768, 556 864, 873 Crisler, 285 N.W.2d 679 (Minn.1979); Murphy 336 So.2d 213 (Miss.1976), 429 1076, 819, 795 Nash, 119 N.H. 728, 407 365 Mercier, 211, 302 337 Bowers, A.D.2d 241, N.Y.S.2d 563 (1974) (police reconsider else), Turner, Or.App. 573 (1978) else); Arpan, 597 (S.D.1979) (suspect counsel); Marcum, Wash.App. 441, 975 (1979) (waiver exist initiates conversation). added "well-defined abruptly United's leasing monopoly power." 502, 2236. argues, resolving unsettled nonretroactive, then, close err side behavior. Official awareness dubious counterbalanced official certainty area remained unsettled, through questionable definitively Failure 'encourage disregard decisions, let's-wait-and-see-until-it's-decided-approach.' 561, 2593 original) omitted) 277, 1052, dissenting)). precisely

Category: 0