1

Assignment #2

Assignment #2

Joy Cortez

Riverside City College

 2
Assignment #2
Joy Cortez
ADJ-3-40687
Assignment #2
Assignment #2
1. On October 28, 2016, a complaint was filed alleging that Hazel burglarized a
Walgreens store in Lincoln, Nebraska (the "state case."). Hazel got an attorney. On
January 19, 2017, Hazel was indicted in federal court for stealing from ATM
machines (the "federal case"). On the morning of February 1, 2017, Hazel was
processed out of the county jail and transported to the federal building for her
arraignment in the federal case. At the federal building, Hazel was greeted by FBI
Special Agent Saad for an interview. Saad gave Hazel Miranda warnings; she signed
a waiver form and made incriminating statements. Hazel tried to suppress her
statements, claiming that Agent Saad could not question her without an attorney on
the federal case because she had an attorney for the state case. You are the judge.
Will you suppress Hazel's statements? (ROL: Miranda right to counsel).
By acting as judge of the decision of whether to suppress Hazel’s statements the rule of

law regarding Miranda right to counsel comes into play. When Agent Saad informed Hazel

of her rights she was told she could have an attorney present or choose to remain silent. If I

were the judge, I would not suppress Hazel’s statements because she was reminded once

again of her rights and declined the option to have an attorney present and voluntarily gave

incriminating statements.

2. During a custodial interrogation about a shooting, the officers read the

suspect Miranda warnings and he competently waived his rights. Officer Smith then
said to the suspect that this was his "last chance" to "distance himself" from the
crime by admitting that he was present during the shooting. The officers said it was
clear the suspect was simply "in the wrong place at the wrong time." One officer
said, "The district attorney is going to see this. The judge is going to see this, and
when they hear you spinning this tale, you're not helping yourself. So, tell the story
of what happened out there. If you didn't pull the trigger, now's the chance for you
to tell your story." The suspect confessed, and later moved to suppress his
confession, claiming coercion. The government said the confession was voluntary.
Which side will win? (ROL: Voluntariness, trickery).

In this case to decide if the confession should be suppressed or not claiming that the

statements were coerced will not hold up in court. The suspect was told of his rights and
 3
Assignment #2
voluntarily waived them and complied with the interrogation. The law states that any

trickery or lies told “to a suspect who has already waived his rights remains legal” (Jirad

2020). In this case everything the officers told to the suspect, true or not, were after he

waived his rights thus making his statement legal.

3. Randy and Vonny were co-conspirators involved in a drug distribution conspiracy.

Randy was caught by police officers and made a deal that allowed him to remain on
the street and act as an informant. Right before the investigation was about to end
and Randy's role as an informant was about to be exposed, Randy gave a statement
to police detailing his role in the conspiracy, and then he died. At Vonny's trial, the
state sought to introduce Randy's statement made to police before he died. On the
basis of his Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause right, what objections, if any,
can Vonny make to the admission of Randy's statement? (ROL: Confrontation
Clause).

Regarding the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause right Vonny has every right to

object to the admission of Randy’s statement. The Confrontation Clause clearly states

that the “defendant has a right to confront the witness through the mechanism of cross-

examination” (Jirad 2020). An exception to this clause that relates to our case is if the

defendant is not able to cross examine the witness, that witness statements cannot be used

and admitted in court. So, with Randy being dead Vonny would not be able to confront

him thus rendering Randy’s statements void in court.

4. Nicole and Shania were contemplating robbing the local bank. They purchased
handguns and tools to break into the bank's vault. As they approached the bank's
entrance, they became afraid and started to run away, but astute police officers
noticed their suspicious behavior, chased after the women, and arrested them. The
officers notified the prosecutor, who wrote an information charging both women
with attempted robbery. The women filled out forms that indicated they were
indigent and in need of appointed counsel. They appeared before the judge, who
read the charges aloud in court and appointed counsel for each woman. The women
were returned to jail and placed in separate cells. Police came to see Shania and
asked if she would like to speak with them. They read Shania her Miranda rights,
but she said nothing, and the officers left. In Nicole's cell, police placed an
informant, Ellie. Ellie struck up a conversation with Nicole and asked, 'What did
you do to get yourself in this mess?" Nicole told Ellie about the plot to rob the bank.
 4
Assignment #2
Before trial, both women raised claims that their Sixth Amendment right to counsel
had been violated. Are they correct? (ROL: Montejo and Massiah precedents).

Yes, the women are correct, their Sixth Amendment rights to counsel were violated. In

the Massiah precedents, both women were already indicted and the placing the informant

violated the clause of the “government cannot “deliberately elicit” incriminating

information from the defendant” (Jirad 2020). Ellie specifically asked questions

regarding Nicole’s trial which violated the clause, but if Nicole was just talking to Ellie

without asking it would have been legal. The Montejo precedents do not relate to this

case because they were not officers that approached Nicole, it was an informant that had

not identified herself as an officer. Therefore, violating their Sixth Amendments rights.

5. Jackson was private counsel appointed to represent Joey on kidnapping charges.

When Joey spoke about the case, he insisted that the victim, Betsy, was secretly in
love with him and went with Joey willingly across state lines. Joey had a mental
health history for stalking. Betsy told police that Joey had abducted her from a
crowded parking lot. Many eyewitnesses had seen Betsy screaming and struggling
before Joey forced her into the car and sped away. Jackson thought Joey's best
move at trial would be to admit the facts of the case and to hire an expert to inform
the jury of Joey's delusions. Joey insisted he was innocent but did not object to
Jackson's trial strategy. Jackson asked the court for funds to have Joey
psychologically evaluated before trial, but the judge said Jackson had already spent
his allotted indigency defense funds, and there was no more state money. At trial,
Jackson admitted to the jury that Joey was guilty but asked for mercy based on
Joey's medical condition. Joey was convicted and appealed on the basis of ineffective
assistance of counsel because Jackson admitted his guilt and because the court
refused to pay for medical services. Will Joey win his appeal? (ROL: Nixon, McCoy,
and Ake precedents; ineffective assistance of counsel claims).

No Joey will not win his appeal based on ineffective assistance of counsel just because

Jackson admitted his guilt. The Nixon and McCoy precedents state that the defendant

must decide “whether to plead guilty, waive a jury, testify in his or her own behalf, or

take an appeal” (Jirad 2020) and “the defense counsel must cede to the client’s wishes to

maintain his innocence” (Jirad 2020). Ineffective assistance of counsel claims are only
 5
Assignment #2
accepted if “the attorney’s performance before and during trial falls below the standard of

a minimally competent attorney” (Jirad 2020). Joey did not either agree or disagree to his

attorney’s strategy making his claims invalid.

 6
Assignment #2
References

Jirard, S.A. (2020). Criminal Law & Procedure: A Courtroom Approach. Sage

Publications; Thousand Oaks, CA.