Legal Opinion
Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Bland, D.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided May 26, 2015No. 33 EAP 2013PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*646 OPINION
Chief Justice SAYLOR.
Presently, we consider the effectiveness of an anticipatory invocation of the Miranda-based right to counsel.
To provide context, we begin with a brief summary of settled legal principles. The text of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution expressly establishes a right to counsel pertaining in the criminal-law context. See U.S. Const, amend. VI (“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right ... to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.”). This prescribed entitlement, however, attaches at critical stages only after the…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Edwards v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Rhode Island v. InnisSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Davis v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- McNeil v. WisconsinSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Commonwealth v. YandamuriSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
- Com. v. Anderson, M.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
- Com. v. Crothers, M.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
- Com. v. Frierson, K.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
- Com. v. Mosley, A.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2020