Legal Opinion
State v. Forbush
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
Decided December 29, 2009No. 2008AP3007-CRPublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPeterson, J.
¶ 1. Brad Forbush was represented by an attorney on charges of sexual assault and false imprisonment. Nevertheless, the police questioned him and he confessed. State v. Dagnall, 2000 WI 82, 236 Wis. 2d 339, 612 N.W.2d 680, held that the Sixth Amendment prohibits police from questioning someone represented by an attorney on criminal charges without the attorney present. So the circuit court suppressed Forbush's confession.
¶ 2. Sometime after the circuit court's decision, the United States Supreme Court held that the Sixth Amendment does not bar police from questioning a represented defendant…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Edwards v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- McNeil v. WisconsinSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Michigan v. JacksonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Minnick v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. ForbushWisconsin Supreme Court · 2011
- State v. HamptonCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2010
- State v. Jesse J. DelebreauWisconsin Supreme Court · 2015
- State v. DelebreauCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2014
- State v. ForbushWisconsin Supreme Court · 2011
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.