Question

After obtaining a waiver of a suspect's rights police start the process of interrogating a criminal suspect about a particular crime. After a few questions are asked, the suspect clearly and unambiguously communicates her desire to talk to an attorney. Which of the following legal limitations are placed on the police?

a) ​They cannot, from this point forward, take any steps to deliberately elicit incriminating statements, under any circumstances.
b) ​They cannot, from this point forward, take any steps to deliberately elicit incriminating statements unless the criminal suspect initiates the contact.
c) ​They can ignore the request because it was not put forth in writing.
d) ​They can ignore the request because it was made after an initial waiver of rights was secured.

Answer 1

The police must cease efforts to elicit incriminating statements when a suspect requests an attorney during interrogation, as per Miranda v. Arizona. Suspects can assert their rights anytime, despite an initial waiver.

Step-by-step explanation:

When a criminal suspect communicates a clear and unambiguous desire to talk to an attorney during police interrogation, the police face legal limitations on their actions. The correct legal limitation in this scenario is b) They cannot, from this point forward, take any steps to deliberately elicit incriminating statements unless the criminal suspect initiates the contact. This is grounded in the principles established by Miranda v. Arizona, where suspects must be advised of their rights and interrogation must cease if the suspect expresses the wish to remain silent or wants attorney representation. The suspect's upfront waiver of rights is modifiable, and they can assert their rights at any time during questioning, as established by the Miranda rights and subsequent cases such as Montejo v. Louisiana.