Case Study Of Captain Wilson's Fifth Amendment Law

1018 Words3 Pages

. Motion: Detective Willis’ questioning after Captain Wilson’s request for an attorney did not violate Captain Wilson’s Fifth Amendment rights. Along with Captain Wilson’s statement to the undercover police detective is admissible as evidence under the Fifth Amendment.

2. Facts: On July 2016, a group of six people, including Captain Eric Wilson, was in Fort Collins heavily drinking at a friend’s bachelor party. Captain Wilson broke into an SUV that he believed to be one of his friend’s, Mike. After waiting for Mike for some time, Captain Wilson decided to hot-wire the car and drive home. While driving home, Captain Wilson was intoxicated to the point of swerving and killing an innocent bicyclist. After getting out of the vehicle …show more content…

Argument: Detective Willis’ questioning of the after Captain Wilson’s request for an attorney was not in violation Captain Wilson’s Fifth Amendment rights. The Fifth Amendment is applicable to this case because there was government action involved. In addition, Captain Wilson was by definition in custody because he was arrested and taken to the police station where the suspect lost his freedom of action. Officer Heinrichs informed Captain Wilson of his Miranda rights and began questioning. While Captain Wilson was indecisive to either remain silent or follow his commanders advice, he did not invocate his right to remain silent clear and unambiguous to the police officers. That is why the questioning continued for another thirty minutes. Once Captain Wilson clearly implied “I am going to call a lawyer right now” is when the police officers ceased questioning immediately. As for Captain Wilsons statements to the undercover police detective “Jim”, are admissible under the Fifth Amendment. “Jim’s” question to Captain Wilson of why he was in jail is not in violation of the Fifth Amendment. Captain Wilson still had knowledge of his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent because Officer Heinrich recently gave Wilson’s Miranda rights during their questioning. In addition, Miranda rights are only applicable during a custodial interrogation. Where in this matter, there was no custodial interrogation. “Jim” was not interrogating Captain Wilson. “Jim” was asking a

More about Case Study Of Captain Wilson's Fifth Amendment Law

Open Document