Court Opinion

ID: 9567654
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 19:56:26.108244+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:00:30.175786
License: Public Domain

Hill, Justice,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent from that part of the first division of the opinion which holds that, after a Jackson-Denno hearing shows that the defendant was not advised of his Miranda right to the assistance of appointed counsel, the trial transcript may be considered to show that he was so advised. It is one thing to consider the trial transcript to supplement a Jackson-Denno hearing; it is a different thing to refer to the trial transcript to contradict the evidence adduced at the Jackson-Denno hearing. Cf. Sanders v. State, supra, Morales v. New York, supra.
Thus in my view it was error to admit the defendant’s confession into evidence.