State v. Stone

PHIPPS, Presiding Judge.

After a jury trial in October 2006, Raymond Stone was convicted of several offenses. In his direct appeal from those convictions (hereinafter Stone I), 1 he contended that the trial court erred by admitting his custodial statement. 2 Specifically, Stone argued that the statement was obtained in violation of his Sixth Amendment right to counsel. 3 We agreed, based upon the holding of the United States Supreme Court’s decision of Michigan v. Jackson, 4 and thus reversed Stone’s convictions. 5 And because the evidence sufficed to support the convictions, we noted that…