Opinion ID: 150480
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Voluntariness of the waiver

Text: In his brief, Treesh contends that even if [he] had been properly warned of and had knowingly waived his Miranda rights, his statements were not voluntary, because he was coerced into confessing when Officer Doyle lied to him by falsely claiming that a video tape of the crime existed, and by exploiting Treesh's desire to exonerate his girl friend. Treesh also argues that the officers were overreaching by exploiting Treesh's exhaustion and cocaine-induced high. Nonetheless, he cites no case law in support of his argument. [I]t is a `settled appellate rule that issues adverted to in a perfunctory manner, unaccompanied by some effort at developed argumentation, are deemed waived.' United States v. Elder, 90 F.3d 1110, 1118 (6th Cir.1996) (quoting United States v. Zannino, 895 F.2d 1, 17 (1st Cir.1990)); see also United States v. Layne, 192 F.3d 556, 566-67 (6th Cir.1999) (deeming issue waived where defendant did not make a legal argument regarding the issue). Because Treesh has not developed a legal argument regarding the voluntariness of his statement, he has forfeited this issue on appeal.