United States v. John Wysinger

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that defendant’s initial question — “Do I need a lawyer before we start talking?” — “was not an unequivocal request for a lawyer and [law enforcement] was not required to cease the interrogation at that point.”
• concluding that a warning appearing to give the defendant a choice of when he could have a lawyer—that he “had the ‘right to talk to a lawyer for advice before we ask any questions or have . . . an attorney with you during questioning’ ”—violated Miranda
• stating, in evaluating whether defendant invoked right to counsel during videotaped interview, that dispute concerning \legal effect\ of undisputed words spoken is \question of law\
• reviewing cases and stating that “I want an attorney before making a deal” was a clear request for counsel while “[m]aybe I should talk to a lawyer“ was not
• “‘Do I need a lawyer?’ … indicates that the asker is contemplating whether he is in need of the services of a lawyer[.]”
• in determining whether a suspect clearly invoked his or her right to counsel, we consider the circumstances in which the statement was made as well as the words employed

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).