Holloway v. State

Two attacks are launched by the defendant. The first essentially charges that the incriminatory admissions made by him as to both charges were constitutionally tainted and could not be used to convict him. The second substantially is that he was denied effective assistance of counsel under the Sixth amendment of the United States constitution, because he was represented in a conspiracy trial by counsel who also represented a co-defendant.

Defendant’s first attack raises two issues:(1) Does the Escobedo doctrine apply to exclude statements made to police when defendant was in custody if…