Davis v. United States
- Decided
- June 24, 1994
- Docket
- 92-1949
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 2,777 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- holding that an arrestee's comment that "maybe [she] should talk to a lawyer" did not constitute an unambiguous request for counsel — United States v. Posada-Rios (1998)
- holding that the defendant’s remark — “Maybe I should talk to a lawyer” — was not a request for counsel — v. Mentzer (2020)
- holding that reading a suspect his rights was a proper response to question, "What about an attorney?" — State v. Glatzmayer (2001)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
[*454] Justice O’Connor delivered the opinion of the Court.
In Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U. S. 477 (1981), we held that law enforcement officers must immediately cease questioning a suspect who has clearly asserted his right to have counsel present during custodial interrogation. In this case we decide how law enforcement officers should respond when a suspect makes a reference to counsel that is insufficiently clear to invoke the Edwards prohibition on further questioning.
I
Statutes cited
Cite this
Davis v. United States, 512 U.S. 452 (1994)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.