Opinion ID: 1969868
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Confession Admissible

Text: Knight's second contention is based upon Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477, 101 S.Ct. 1880, 68 L.Ed.2d 378 (1981). In Edwards, the United States Supreme Court held that an accused ... having expressed his desire to deal with the police only through counsel, is not subject to further interrogation by the authorities until counsel has been made available to him, unless the accused himself initiates further communication, exchanges, or conversations with the police. Id. at 484-85, 101 S.Ct. at 1885. When a defendant moves to suppress a statement under the Edwards rule, the trial judge must determine: first, whether the accused actually invoked his right to counsel; and second, if so, whether the accused initiated further communication with the police, and then knowingly and intelligently waived the right he had previously invoked. Smith v. Illinois, 469 U.S. 91, 95, 105 S.Ct. 490, 492-93, 83 L.Ed.2d 488 (1984); Crawford v. State, Del.Supr., 580 A.2d 571, 574 (1990). In this case, the police testified that although Knight initially invoked his right to counsel, within 30 minutes, he changed his mind and initiated further contact with the police, telling them he wanted to make a statement. The police also testified that before initiating further questioning, they made certain that Knight no longer wished to consult with an attorney. Smith v. Illinois, 469 U.S. 91, 105 S.Ct. 490, 83 L.Ed.2d 488 (1984). Knight testified to the contrary. As a matter of credibility, the trial judge rejected Knight's testimony and accepted that of the police. It is well-settled that the trier of fact is the sole judge of the credibility of the witnesses and responsible for resolving conflicts in the testimony. Tyre v. State, Del. Supr., 412 A.2d 326, 330 (1980). The record supports the trial judge's finding that Knight initiated further discussion after invoking his right to counsel, and that he knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel before questioning began. Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477, 101 S.Ct. 1880, 68 L.Ed.2d 378 (1981). The Superior Court properly denied Knight's motion to exclude his confession from being admitted into evidence at trial.