State v. Mayer

¶1 — We must determine whether a deputy sheriff inadequately advised the defendant of his rights under Miranda1 when he initially told the defendant that a lawyer would be appointed for him prior to questioning if he could not afford one but also said that no lawyer would be *551appointed for him unless he was arrested, jailed, and taken to court. The deputy did not clarify that the defendant was not obligated to respond to questions until he had the opportunity to confer with a lawyer. We hold that although this Miranda advisement was contradictory and confusing and thus violated the defendant’s…