U.S. v. Martin

In prosecution on drug and firearm charges, Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress inculpatory statement given during second interview even though defendant initially indicated during first interview that he wished to consult with his attorney prior to giving any written statement. Dist. Ct. could properly have found that defendant's invocation of his Miranda right to remain silent was limited in scope to request to give written statement where: (1) defendant had previously been given Miranda warning prior to first interview and directly responded to request to make written statement; (2) defendant's response of needing to consult attorney "before I do that" operated as clear limitation of his invocation of right to remain silent; and (3) defendant signed additional Miranda waiver at start of second interview. (Dissent filed.)