United States v. David H. Nixon, Jr.

Ninth Circuit

United States v. David H. Nixon, Jr.

571 F.2d 1121, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 12254

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedMarch 9, 1978

Docket75-3820

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 571 F.2d 1121 (United States v. David H. Nixon, Jr.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. David H. Nixon, Jr., 571 F.2d 1121, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 12254 (9th Cir. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The Government’s petition for rehearing is granted. The opinions heretofore filed are withdrawn. In their stead, the following per curiam opinion is substituted:

Upon the authority of United States v. Rodriguez-Gastelum, 569 F.2d 482 (9th Cir. en banc No. 76-2241, 1978) [Slip Op’n p. 309, Jan. 30, 1978], the questioning of a suspect in custody can be resumed if the Government bears its heavy burden of proof that the suspect effectively waived his prior request for assistance of counsel.

The Government failed to bear its burden of proving waiver of counsel in this case. The interrogation followed hard on the heels of the demand for counsel. Nixon’s right under those circumstances to have questioning cease was not scrupulously honored. (Michigan v. Mosley, 423 U.S. 96, 96 S.Ct. 321, 46 L.Ed.2d 313 (1976); United States v. Rodriguez-Gastelum, supra.)

The motion to suppress the inculpatory statements should have been granted.

REVERSED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI