State v. Gillispie

Interviews must immediately cease when a suspect invokes “the rights to remain silent and council.” State v. Boyd, 360 Or 302, 318, 380 P3d 941 (2016). If the interview continues after the suspect invokes the right to counsel, the interview is considered unlawful. State v. Schmidtke, 290 Or App 880, 884, 417 P3d 563 (2018).

Defendant appealed his conviction for manslaughter in the first degree (ORS 163.118). Defendant assigned error to the trial court’s denial of the Defendant’s motion to suppress statements made during interrogation. Defendant argued that the detectives violated Article 1, Section 12 of the Oregon Constitution and the Fifth Amendment of the United States. State argued that the Defendant waived his right to counsel when he continually initiated conversation with the detectives. Interviews must immediately cease when a suspect invokes “the rights to remain silent and council.” State v. Boyd, 360 Or 302, 318, 380 P3d 941 (2016). If the interview continues after the suspect invokes the right to counsel, the interview is considered unlawful. State v. Schmidtke, 290 Or App 880, 884, 417 P3d 563 (2018). The Court held that the investigator’s interrogation was not unlawful because the defendant had “unasked” for an attorney and, after being reminded multiple times by the officers that he invoked his right to an attorney, he continued to keep speaking.