In re H.V.
Texas Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Chief Justice JEFFERSON,
joined by Justice WAINWRIGHT and Justice GREEN, and joined by Justice HECHT as to parts I, III, and V, concurring and dissenting.
We cannot construe H.V.’s statement that he “wanted his mother to ask for an attorney” without first addressing the considerable body of precedent on this subject. If we were writing on a clean slate, I would agree that the statement invokes his right to counsel. But the Supreme Court has held that anything short of an unambiguous request will not suffice. Davis v. United States, 512 U.S. 452, 459, 114 S.Ct. 2350, 129 L.Ed.2d 362 (1994)(“[A]…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Yarborough v. AlvaradoSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Davis v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Fare v. Michael C.Supreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Dinkins v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1995
- Billy Russell Clark v. Tim MurphyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.