Court Opinion

ID: 9755242
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 20:31:17.677631+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:28:05.613914
License: Public Domain

WOMACK, J.,
filed a concurring opinion, in which COCHRAN, J., joined.
I join the Court’s opinion with the understanding that, as the Court of Appeals’ *192opinion said, the “chain of events is undisputed.”
The dissenting opinion says, “It is reasonable to believe that when Officer Ramirez introduced himself, he stated in the same breath that he was there to talk to appellee about the offense.” Post, at 194. But there is no evidence to support such a belief, and the decision of the Court of Appeals which we are reviewing did not rest on it.
The most that could be said on this evidence is that, if the officer went to the jail intending to violate the appellee’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel, the appellee was too quick for him.