finding scrivener’s error where the trial court wrongly labeled subsection of statute it used to enhance the defendant’s sentence
How later courts described this case
- finding scrivener’s error where the trial court wrongly labeled subsection of statute it used to enhance the defendant’s sentence
- finding a sentence of life without parole is subject to the same statutory standards and requirements as the death penalty
- ''The federal right to counsel as protected by the Sixth Amendment, so as to ensure a fair trial after charges are filed is not implicated here because Ajabu had not been charged or arraigned at the time of the alleged constitutional deprivation."
- considering the contemporary plain meaning of “compel” to interpret the Self-incrimination Clause of the Indiana Constitution
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
SELBY, Justice,
concurring with separate opinion.
I agree with the majority; however, I write separately to address the actions of the police and prosecutors in this case. This case does not involve a personal appearance by the lawyer at the stationhouse or a request to speak with the suspect. The Court’s holding today should not be understood to apply to those circumstances, which might present different considerations depending on the factual context or constitutional provision at issue, as the Court’s footnote 5 implies. While it may be true that the law enforcement officials did not act in a manner egregious enough to constitute a violation of defendant’s constitutional rights under Bur-bine, we should not condone such conduct.
DICKSON, J., concurs.