NCJ Number
129798
Journal
Crime to Court Dated: (March 1991) Pages: 11-14
Date Published
1991
Length
3 pages
Annotation
United States Supreme Court justices Rehnquist and Scalia dissented from the majority in the 1990 decision in Minnick v. United States which involved the accused person's right to have counsel present during an interrogation initiated by a law enforcement official.
Abstract
The FBI agents who first interviewed Minnick on August 23, 1986 advised him of his Miranda rights before any questioning began. Although he refused to sign a waiver form, he agreed to talk to the agents and described his escape from prison in Mississippi and the ensuing events. However, he hesitated when he came to what happened at the trailer. The FBI agents reminded him that he did not have to answer questions without a lawyer present. Minnick indicated that he would finish his account 2 days later when he had a lawyer. He consulted with an appointed attorney several times over the weekend. On Monday, a Mississippi deputy sheriff interviewed him, first reminding him of his Miranda rights. Minnick refused to sign a waiver form, but he did tell about his participation in the double murder and did not ask for his attorney. The Constitution's proscription of compelled testimony does not apply to the Minnick case, because Minnick confessed freely and voluntarily. Photograph