Lifestyle Having to write on Florida v. Powell 5590U.S. 50 (2010) for my Uni's class brief.

Ironsides

Ironsides

✝️subhuman
May 27, 2023
1,351
It's due in about a week and a half and I wanted to get started on it right now.
The case is about how a nigger got caught with a gun when he wasn't supposed to cause he misbehaved in the past.
The funnier part though is that he would have gotten away with it if the supreme court come to cuck him HARD in the ass lol...

The Florida State Supreme Court ruled in his favor:
Surveying decisions of this Court as well as Florida precedent, the Florida Supreme Court answered the certified question in the affirmative. 998 So. 2d 531, 532 (2008). “Both Miranda and article I, section 9 of the Florida Constitution,”[Footnote 1] the Florida High Court noted, “require that a suspect be clearly informed of the right to have a lawyer present during questioning.” Id., at 542. The court found that the advice Powell received was misleading because it suggested that Powell could “only consult with an attorney before questioning” and did not convey Powell’s entitlement to counsel’s presence throughout the interrogation. Id., at 541. Nor, in the court’s view, did the final catchall warning—“[y]ou have the right to use any of these rights at any time you want during this interview”—cure the defect the court perceived in the right-to-counsel advice: “The catch-all phrase did not supply the missing warning of the right to have counsel present during police questioning,” the court stated, for “a right that has never been expressed cannot be reiterated.” Ibid.

but ofc the Supreme Court was probably high on drugs and anxious to jerk one out so they decided to grant certiorari lol.
The funny thing is that the defendant filed that the Supreme Court didn't have the jurisdiction to hear the case since a basis of the decision was on Florida's Constitution which mirrors was the Constitution of the US says...
However, the Supreme Court was lik nuh huh and said that dealt with Miranda which is a federal case..

To that end, we announced, in Michigan v. Long, 463 U. S. 1032, 1040–1041 (1983), the following presumption:


“[W]hen . . . a state court decision fairly appears to rest primarily on federal law, or to be interwoven with the federal law, and when the adequacy and independence of any possible state law ground is not clear from the face of the opinion, we will accept as the most reasonable explanation that the state court decided the case the way it did because it believed that federal law required it to do so.”

Anyways, not to shit this thread up, this case dealt with how the suspect was not given miranda that he could have a lawyer present DURING questioning, but before it.
However, the police used a catchall phrase that said that ALL the rights given can be used during questioning.
Supreme Court finished themselves by writing out that it was good enuff lol..

i wish i could be a supreme court nigga and just jerk off while dooming niggas to life and death sentences xd
 
  • +1
Reactions: RNT
Spooky_Heejin

Spooky_Heejin

Blackpill Padawan
Jan 1, 2024
348
Anyways, not to shit this thread up, this case dealt with how the suspect was not given miranda that he could have a lawyer present DURING questioning, but before it.
However, the police used a catchall phrase that said that ALL the rights given can be used during questioning.
Supreme Court finished themselves by writing out that it was good enuff lol..
Is this part just a state thing or a nationwide thing? Why didn't they tell Christopher Watts this and interrogated him without telling him he can have access to a lawyer?
 
Activity
So far there's no one here
Top