Certiorari denied.
MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN and MR. JUSTICE MARSHALL, dissenting.
Petitioner contends that he was unconstitutionally convicted because a statement he made during in-custody interrogation was admitted in evidence during the prosecution's case-in-chief, despite the absence of any warning to petitioner that if he could not afford an attorney one would be appointed to represent him before questioning. See Miranda v. Arizona,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.