History
  • No items yet
midpage
Lowe v. State
408 So. 2d 201
Ala. Crim. App.
1981
Check Treatment

Robbery, first degree; sentence: twenty years' imprisonment.

The appellant's inculpatory statement was admitted into evidence over his motion to suppress and his objection that theMiranda1 warning given him was incomplete and thus defective. The Attorney General tacitly admits error by filing the following statement with this court:

"Due to the Miranda predicate laid below, the State respectfully declines to submit a brief in the above styled case."

The purported Miranda warning given to the appellant in the instant case did not apprise him "that if he cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed for him prior to any questioning." Miranda, 384 U.S. at 479, 86 S.Ct. at 1630. Such omission rendered the warning defective. Marcus v. State,50 Ala. App. 526, 280 So.2d 786, 291 Ala. 350, 280 So.2d 793 (1973); Square v. State, 283 Ala. 548, 219 So.2d 377 (1968). The appellant's motion to suppress the statement should have been granted.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

All the Judges concur.

1 Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602,16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966).

Case Details

Case Name: Lowe v. State
Court Name: Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama
Date Published: Dec 29, 1981
Citation: 408 So. 2d 201
Docket Number: 6 Div. 571
Court Abbreviation: Ala. Crim. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.