Fifth Amendment, Miranda

People v Tanner, 496 Mich 199; __ NW2d __ (2014)(june’14). Charged with murder, Defendant was read his Miranda rights and invoked his right to counsel. The next day Defendant told a jail psychologist he wanted to “get something off his chest.” The psychologist told jail staff and the jail administrator spoke to Defendant who asked for an attorney. The jail administrator told Defendant he could not provide counsel but could contact police and Defendant agreed. The administrator informed the prosecution and police. Law enforcement and an attorney, apparently provided by the court when the prosecutor informed the court of Defendant’s request, arrived at the same time. The jail administrator told the attorney to wait while he allowed police to interview Defendant, who did not know an attorney was waiting for him at the jail. The Defendant incriminated himself in the murder and the trial court suppressed Defendant’s statements under People v Bender, 452 Mich 594 (1996), which held that police must promptly inform a suspect that an attorney is available when that attorney has made contact with them. In a 5-2 decision, McCormack and Cavanagh dissenting, the court overruled Bender and held Defendant’s statements were voluntary and admissible. The majority found that the uncoerced waiver of Miranda rights by Defendant was not impacted by the fact that Defendant did not know an attorney was waiting to see him, citing Moran v Burbine, 475 US 412 (1986).