People v. Ward

This case presents question as to whether trial court properly denied defendant’s motion to suppress his confession that was made during videotaped interrogation by police, where trial court found after review of videotape that defendant did not unambiguously invoke his right to counsel. Appellate Court, after its own de novo review of videotape, reversed defendant’s conviction, after finding that defendant had, in fact, invoked his right to counsel. In its petition for leave to appeal, state argued that Appellate Court used wrong standard of review, and that Appellate Court should have reviewed factual findings made by trial court in suppression hearing under clear error standard.