Court Opinion

ID: 9860307
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 23:17:39.992203+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:20:44.528651
License: Public Domain

GIVAN, Chief Justice,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion in this case. As pointed out by the majority, appellant admitted to the arresting officer that he had no license for the gun, that he had stolen it and had robbed two people just prior to his arrest. It was after making such incriminating statements he made the statement he wished to say nothing further until he spoke with an attorney.
His subsequent conversation with another police officer after his arrival at the station added nothing to his prior incriminating statements. There is no evidence that either the appellant himself or the arresting officer informed the officer who questioned him at police headquarters that he had asked to see an attorney. Appellant could certainly have made his request for an attorney known to officers at police headquarters at the time they gave him his Miranda warnings.
I would hold that the trial judge committed no reversible error in the trial of this case.
PIVARNIK, J., concurs.