 |
| Maryland v. Shatzer | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued October 5, 2009 Decided February 24, 2010 | |
| Full case name | Maryland, Petitioner v. Michael Blaine Shatzer, Sr. |
| Docket no. | 08-680 |
| Citations | 559 U.S. 98 (more) 130 S. Ct. 1213; 175 L. Ed. 2d 1045; 2010 U.S. LEXIS 1899 |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Defendant convicted, No. 21–K–06–37799 (Cir. Ct. Washington Cty., Md., September 21, 2006); Court of Appeals of Maryland reversed and remanded, 405 Md., at 606–607, 954 A. 2d, at 1131; cert. granted, 555 U. S. ___ (2009). 405 Md. 585, 954 A. 2d 1118 |
| Questions presented | |
| Is the Edwards v. Arizona prohibition against interrogation of a suspect who has invoked the Fifth Amendment right to counsel inapplicable if, after the suspect asks for counsel, there is a break in custody or a substantial lapse in time (more than two years and six months) before commencing reinterrogation pursuant to Miranda? | |
| Holding | |
| Because Shatzer experienced a break in Miranda custody lasting more than two weeks between the first and second attempts at interrogation, Edwards does not mandate suppression of his 2006 statements. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Scalia, joined by Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito, Sotomayor; Thomas (Part III) |
| Concurrence | Thomas (in part and in judgment) |
| Concurrence | Stevens (in judgment) |
Maryland v. Shatzer, 559 U.S. 98 (2010), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that police may re-open questioning of a suspect who has asked for counsel (thereby under Edwards v. Arizona ending questioning) if there has been a 14-day or more break in Miranda custody. The ruling distinguished Edwards, which had not specified a limit.