Reimers v. State

Upon this appeal it is the contention of the defendant, Reimers, that the receiving of his confessions into evidence was a violation of his constitutional rights under the Sixth amendment to the constitution of the United States because he was not given an opportunity to consult with counsel at and prior to the time the confessions were obtained.

The defendant has abandoned his claim of insanity. He does not deny he shot Holmes and struck Ruth Rollef-son with the gun. He does not claim the evidence in the record is insufficient to warrant a conviction of first-degree murder and aggravated…