Kevin Moore v. Mary Berghuis, 700 F.3d 882

Moore was convicted in Michigan state court of first-degree premeditated murder, felon in possession of a firearm, and firearm in the commission of a felony, and sentenced to life, 3-5 years, and 2 years respectively.
Moore voluntarily surrendered to police and was questioned in custody after reportedly requesting an attorney and after an attorney contact attempt failed.
Moore moved to suppress the custodial statement; the trial court found an initial request for counsel but that he waived rights by signing a waiver and speaking, without a clear later request for counsel.
Michigan appellate courts affirmed, concluding Moore initiated further conversation with police after requesting counsel; the Michigan Supreme Court denied leave to appeal.
Moore filed a federal habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 arguing the custodial statement admission violated his rights; the district court denied relief.
The Sixth Circuit held that the Michigan Court unreasonably applied Edwards v. Arizona and granted the petition, reversing the district court and ordering release unless retrial is commenced within 180 days.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the custodial statement after Moore invoked counsel violated Edwards.	Moore argues the interrogation continued after invoking counsel, violating Edwards.	State contends Edwards was satisfied or properly applied, and waiver occurred.	Moore's claim merits relief; state court unreasonably applied Edwards.
Whether Moore validly waived his right to counsel.	Waiver was not valid because the officer reinitiated questioning after Moore invoked counsel.	State contends Moore waived rights by signing a waiver and initiating talk.	Waiver was not proven valid; conducting interrogation after request violated Edwards.
Whether the admission of the custodial statement was harmless error under Brecht.	The confession was pivotal to guilt and its admission harmed the defense.	Other evidence sufficiently linked Moore to the crime; confession was duplicative.	Not harmless; admission had substantial and injurious effect; relief granted.

Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 (Supreme Court, 1981) (right to counsel must be available once invoked during custodial interrogation)
McKinney v. Ludwick, 649 F.3d 484 (6th Cir., 2011) (summarizes right to counsel and waiver in this circuit)
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (Supreme Court, 1966) (establishes general rule that interrogation must cease when counsel is requested)
Moran v. Burbine, 475 U.S. 412 (Supreme Court, 1986) (waiver requires voluntary, knowing, and intelligent relinquishment of rights)
Berghuis v. Thompkins, 130 S. Ct. 2250 (U.S. Supreme Court, 2010) (waiver analysis for right to remain silent; distinguishes from right to counsel)
Colorado v. Connelly, 479 U.S. 157 (Supreme Court, 1986) (preponderance standard for waivers of rights)
O'Neal v. McAinch, 513 U.S. 432 (Supreme Court, 1995) (Brecht harmless-error standard applicable in AEDPA habeas review)
Kyger v. Carlton, 146 F.3d 374 (6th Cir., 1998) (illustrates admissibility and impact of custodial statements on guilt)
Tolliver v. Sheets, 594 F.3d 900 (6th Cir., 2010) (Brecht standard for evaluating harmlessness of constitutional error)
Harrington v. Richter, 131 S. Ct. 770 (S. Ct., 2011) (AEDPA deference standards for reviewing state-court rulings)
Parker v. Matthews, - U.S. - (Supreme Court, 2012) (limits on federal habeas relief when state-court decision reasonable)