State Of Louisiana VS David Brown
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
COURT THE FOR COURT OF CLERK LD IRCUIT C. DEPUTY S.~ FIRS: EAL, COU~ application. writ the deny would and dissents J., Holdridge, WJC JMM denied. is application writ interview. the specifically excluding the do defendant barred. be s defendant' not the and remain Ohio, Due arrest impeachment that question to all the fact of for the use portion court the trial the his waived the 2240, He Ct.S. 96 warnings, the at 619, Miranda silence, to inappropriate the of Clause receiving chose draw of after purposes defendant to In 617 & 610, the s petitioner' silent, " remain inferences arrest. his case, instant Amendment." Fourteenth the invoked his defendant violated from final 45, 2244- time of the question that to answer specific Miranda did v. Doyle the Therefore, his Thus, counsel. to reference inappropriately answer: "his and question last The rights not in right interview subsequent 91 ( 2d Ed.L. 49 S. U. 426 and not should and gave silent Process counsel wherein know [ ]t didn' I 11 1976). respects, other and the of invocation statement. a after terminated limine in motion the granted correctly However, right s state' the apt is a jury a and ambiguous" insolubly is " silence arrest post- s accused' an because that, held has Court Supreme States United The allowed. are answer s defendant' the and question this if silent remain to right s defendant' the regarding inference inappropriate an draw would jury a that indication no is There interview. the of termination and s defendant' the counsel to reference right his of invocation subsequent not does colloquy answer and question interview. the terminated and counsel to right his invoked immediately then 11 defendant The know. t didn' I responded, " defendant the scene, crime the at found was officers the to This described just indicated he he shirt that and issue the why to rights. Miranda his 4, interview to November answer law court on his and excluding trial waived night the the defendant of to DENIED the AND JJ. HOLDRIDGE, AND the PART wearing he from 2012, that s enforcement' granting CRAIN, he Upon after question final IN was questioning was question motion on the advised s defendant' in PART. IN The and defendant limine at as in GRANTED McDONALD, erred WRIT BEFORE: 520401. No. Lafourche, of Parish writs, supervisory for Court, District applying Judicial 17th Louisiana, of State Re: In BROWN DAVID 2015 9 0 FEB 1684 KW 2014 VERSUS NO. LOUISIANA OF STATE CIRCUIT FIRST APPEAL, OF COURT LOUISIANA OF STATE
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
