Since 1978, Bryce Bennett has represented businesses, including
insurance companies, product manufacturers, construction contractors,
real estate and development companies, hospitals, nursing homes, and
transportation companies as well as professionals, including doctors,
lawyers, insurance and real estate agents, professional and fraternal
associations, political subdivisions and municipalities including the
City of Indianapolis in thousands of matters, many litigated to
conclusion through dispositive motions, negotiated settlements,
mediations, arbitrations and numerous bench and jury trials in State and
Federal courts.
Bryce H. Bennett, Jr.
is an experienced director of business entities, serving in leadership
positions on many corporate and non-profit boards. Mr. Bennett was
recognized for his work and was the keynote speaker for Indiana
University Kelley School of Business MBA graduates and has been
published and acknowledged in an article in the Indiana Lawyer. His
experience representing businesses have shown favorable results for his
clients. Contact Riley Bennett & Egloff, LLP today to schedule a
free consultation.
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Court: Rights don't have to be read to prisoners
The Supreme Court said Tuesday investigators don't have to read Miranda
rights to inmates during jailhouse interrogations about crimes unrelated
to their current incarceration.
The high court, on a 6-3 vote, overturned a federal appeals court decision throwing out prison inmate Randall Lee Fields' conviction, saying Fields was not in "custody" as defined by Miranda and therefore did not have to have his rights read to him.
"Imprisonment alone is not enough to create a custodial situation within the meaning of Miranda," Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the court's majority opinion.
Three justices, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor, dissented and said the court's decision would limit the rights of prisoners.
"Today, for people already in prison, the court finds it adequate for the police to say: 'You are free to terminate this interrogation and return to your cell,'" Ginsburg said in her dissent. "Such a statement is no substitute for one ensuring that an individual is aware of his rights."
Miranda rights come from a 1966 decision that involved police questioning of Ernesto Miranda in a rape and kidnapping case in Phoenix. It required officers to tell suspects they have the right to remain silent and to have a lawyer represent them, even if they can't afford one.
Previous court rulings have required Miranda warnings before police interrogations for people who are in custody, which is defined as when a reasonable person would think he cannot end the questioning and leave.
The high court, on a 6-3 vote, overturned a federal appeals court decision throwing out prison inmate Randall Lee Fields' conviction, saying Fields was not in "custody" as defined by Miranda and therefore did not have to have his rights read to him.
"Imprisonment alone is not enough to create a custodial situation within the meaning of Miranda," Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the court's majority opinion.
Three justices, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor, dissented and said the court's decision would limit the rights of prisoners.
"Today, for people already in prison, the court finds it adequate for the police to say: 'You are free to terminate this interrogation and return to your cell,'" Ginsburg said in her dissent. "Such a statement is no substitute for one ensuring that an individual is aware of his rights."
Miranda rights come from a 1966 decision that involved police questioning of Ernesto Miranda in a rape and kidnapping case in Phoenix. It required officers to tell suspects they have the right to remain silent and to have a lawyer represent them, even if they can't afford one.
Previous court rulings have required Miranda warnings before police interrogations for people who are in custody, which is defined as when a reasonable person would think he cannot end the questioning and leave.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)