Legal Opinion
People v. Bladel
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided April 1, 1986No. Docket Nos. 69615, 69749. (Calendar Nos. 7, 8)PublishedCited by 70 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCavanagh, J.
The common issue presented in these appeals is whether statements obtained after a defendant has requested appointment of counsel at arraignment are admissible pursuant to the principles enunciated in Edwards v Arizona, 451 US 477; 101 S Ct 1880; 68 L Ed 2d 378 (1981), and People v Paintman, 412 Mich 518; 315 NW2d 418 (1982), cert den 456 US 995; 102 S Ct 2280; 73 L Ed 2d 1292 (1982).
I
A
Defendant Bladel was convicted by a jury in July, 1979, of three counts of first-degree premeditated murder.1 He was sentenced to three concurrent mandatory life sentences. Testimony at trial revealed that…
2Cases cited43 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Edwards v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by70 opinions
- McNeil v. WisconsinSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Michigan v. JacksonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- People v. CiprianoMichigan Supreme Court · 1988
- People v. AndersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1994
- United States of America Ex Rel. Miguel A. Espinoza v. J.W. Fairman, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
65 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.