Court Opinion

ID: 9567355
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 19:52:58.244219+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:00:34.206016
License: Public Domain

Fletcher, Presiding Justice,
concurring.
Relying on the Georgia Constitution, I would adopt the rule that investigating officers must ask questions to clarify whether a suspect wants a lawyer when he or she makes an ambiguous or equivocal request for counsel.6 This rule would provide that “when a suspect under custodial interrogation makes an ambiguous statement that might reasonably be understood as expressing a wish that a lawyer be summoned (and questioning cease), interrogators’ questions should be confined to verifying whether the individual meant to ask for a lawyer.”7 Because the defendant did not challenge the admission of her second statement under our State Constitution and the U. S. Supreme Court has held that the Federal Constitution does not require officers to ask clarifying questions, I reluctantly concur in Division 4.

 See Hall v. State, 255 Ga. 267 (336 SE2d 812) (1985).

 See Davis v. United States, 512 U. S.__(114 SC 2350, 2364, 129 LE2d 362) (1994) (Souter, J., concurring).