Document: 453 U.S. 355 101 S.Ct. 2806 69 L.Ed.2d 696 State of CALIFORNIAv.Randall James PRYSOCK. No. 80-1846. June 29, 1981. PER CURIAM. 1 This case presents the question whether warnings given to respondent prior a recorded conversation with police officer satisfied requirements Miranda v. Arizona, 384 436, 86 1602, 16 694 (1966). Although ordinarily this Court would not be inclined review involving application that precedent particular set facts, see Fare Michael C., 439 1310, 1314, 99 3, 5, 58 19 (1978) (REHNQUIST, J., in chambers, opinion at 442 707, 2560, 61 197 (1979)), California Appeal essentially laid down flat rule requiring content virtual incantation precise language contained opinion. Because such rigid was mandated by or any other decision Court, and is required serve purposes Miranda, we grant motion for leave proceed forma pauperis petition certiorari reverse. 2 On January 30, 1978, Mrs. Donna Iris Erickson brutally murdered. Later evening codefendant were apprehended commission offense. Respondent brought substation Tulare County Sheriff's Department advised his rights. He declined talk and, since he minor, parents notified. Respondent's arrived after meeting them decided answer questions. An questioned respondent, on tape, respondent's present. The tape reflects following questioning: 3 "Sgt. Byrd: . Mr. Randall Prysock, earlier today I you your legal rights time me did wish me, correct? 4 "Randall P.: Yeh. 5 And, uh, during, first interview folks present, they are now want go through again each right like understand it not. Your rights, [sic] follows: Number One, have remain silent. means don't all unless so desire. Do this? 6 7 If give up silent, anything say can will used as evidence against court law. 8 Yes. 9 You lawyer before questioned, him present while being during questioning. 10 also, juvenile, which are. 11 12 Even if weren't here, you'd right. 13 14 all, uh,—if,—you appointed represent no cost yourself. 15 Now, having these mind, do time? 17 Yes." App. A Pet. Cert. i-iii. 18 At point, request took place recorder turned off. According Sgt. Byrd, Prysock asked could still an attorney later gave statement without one. Byrd assured when went "he one wished one." Id., 11.1 trial Superior denied suppress taped statement. convicted jury first-degree murder two special circumstances—torture robbery. Cal.Penal Code Ann. §§ 187, 190.2, 12022(b) (West Supp.1981). also robbery use dangerous weapon, 211, 12022(b), burglary deadly 459, automobile theft, Cal.Veh.Code § 10851 Supp.1981), escape from youth facility, Cal.Welf. & Inst.Code 871 1972), destruction evidence, 135 1970). 20 Fifth Appellate District reversed convictions ordered new because what thought error under Miranda. 4. ruled incriminating statements, had excluded consideration properly services free interrogation. indisputably informed "the questioning," further yourself," inadequate explicitly stated "[o]ne [Miranda's] virtues its easily met," quoted Harryman Estelle, 616 F.2d 870, 873-874 (CA5), cert. denied, 449 860, 161, 66 76 (1980), " 'the rigidity rules way applied conceived continues recognized decision's greatest strength.' 12. Relying previous decisions Appeal, People Bolinski, 260 Cal.App.2d 705, 67 Cal.Rptr. 347 (1968), Stewart, 267 366, 73 484 met case.2 Supreme hearing, justices dissenting. D 21 has never indicated "rigidity" extends formulation criminal defendant. See, e.g., United States Lamia, 429 373, 375-376 (CA2), 400 907, 91 150, 27 146 (1970). others stressed virtue fact giving obviates need case-by-case inquiry into actual voluntariness admissions accused. See U.S., 718, S.Ct., 2568; supra. Nothing observations suggests desirable form warnings. 22 Quite contrary, itself talismanic satisfy strictures. "[t]he waiver necessary accordance our are, absence fully effective equivalent, prerequisites admissibility made defendant." 476, 1629 (emphasis supplied). id., 479, 1630. Just last Term considering noted announced procedural safeguards including familiar their equivalent." Rhode Island Innis, 446 291, 297, 100 1682, 1688, 64 297 (1980) 23 Other courts presented case—whether defendant adequately presence counsel interrogation—have verbatim recital words but rather examined determine reference linked some future point In Garcia, 431 134 (CA9 1970) (per curiam), example, found advice she "have appear U. S. Commissioner Court." supra, relied upon below, type. Two separate sets inadequate. first, "if charged counsel." Cal.App.2d, Cal.Rptr., second, defendant, then Illinois about moved California, appoint [an attorney] Riverside County[, California].' 723, 359 both instances interrogation, therefore advise suspect 24 Here, contrast, nothing suggested limitation different clearly conveyed general, "to questioning." 9-10; ii. Like Noa, 443 144 1971), where substantially similar those here defendant's argument same adopted "[t]his questioning offer associated court. ." 146. 25 It clear told afford These erred holding simply order given.3 26 contrary reversed, remanded proceedings inconsistent ordered. 28 Justice STEVENS, whom BRENNAN MARSHALL join, 29 juvenile may include more three options: (1) able willing hire one; (2) that, cannot attorney, charge trial, even unwilling spend money behalf; (3) unable consult decides police, decline pay representation.1 All options encompassed within possessed crime. case, explained third 30 694, held protect accused's privilege self-incrimination, certain must employed. particular, individual taken custody subjected warnings: 31 "He warned says law, desires." 1629. 32 297. makes beyond doubt indigent accused While certainly true, emphasizes today, Federal Constitution does require "talismanic incantation" opinion, ante, 359, indisputable requires 33 analyzed warning 356-357, concluded been crucial sergeant brief interlude, counsel. ibid. constitutionally inadequate, deviated 34 "[u]nfortunately, minor information available impending original).2 35 There requires, matter federal constitutional effectively provided "crucial information" form. Court's demonstration recited fails come terms express finding information. sufficiently ambiguous face provide adequate support court's finding. That conclusion least reasonable, patently erroneous warrant summary reversal. 36 ambiguity demonstrated colloquy between occurred "right yourself." lawyers normally "appointed" judges, law enforcement officers, reasonably understood refer counsel.3 assumed, ensuing related option lawyer."4 37 judges presumably procedures followed officers than fair construes conscientious appraisal somewhat record "a opinion." Ante, 355. seems state courts, guilty attaching greater importance ritual substance message intended convey. 38 respectfully dissent. concerning off-the-record discussion: Okay, get off During asked, wanted think getting, "Mrs. 'Cause didn't it. And ahead That's persuaded way, No, correct done persuade to, "Mr. everything we're doing strictly yourselves, correct. Okay. Uh, right, Randy, can't remember left off, you, these, mean case? iii-iv. Contrary suggestion, below based reversing ordering "because error." dissent, arguing unfairly criticized mimicking post, 365-366, ignores substantial portions substitutes arguments own articulated Appeal. For dissent mention lower stress "precise requirements" area, portion quotes criticizes repeating exact advising 12-14. conclude parrot substantive reasons implausible. considered suggesting availability postponed, Prysock's occasioned her fear waiving interrogation occasion court, 11, indicating dissenting 504, 1643, Harlan accurately summarized four essential elements person "namely, him, questioning, charge." principal defect sergeant, "needless excursion," inserted discussion description him. 14-15. subsequent untaped "obfuscated, clarified" matter. 15. defective, Miranda," 361, n. because, given, failed convey might appointment undercut Appeal's conclusion. "meaningful unlettered unlearned comprehend knowingly act." Coyote States, 380 305, 308 (CA10 1967), 389 992, 88 489, 484. Such meaningful choose among several reasonable interpretations employed custodial situation. significance references hiring 357-358, 1. bears repeating: iii-iv added).

Category: 0