Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Calvin Demonsier Clements

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Decided July 28, 1983No. 82-5238Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partChapman, Circuit Judge

I respectfully dissent from that portion of the majority opinion holding that this case must be remanded to the district court for a determination of whether Clements’ confession and his consent to a search for the rifle were obtained prior to his being informed of the indictment.

I

Before discussing the new rule which the majority opinion establishes on waiver of a defendant’s sixth amendment right to counsel, I would point out that, even if the introduction of Clements’ confession and the rifle violated his right to counsel, the introduction of this evidence was harmless error because both…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  4. Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  5. Johnson v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 1966

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API