*1 Cir. C. A. 9th 77-1089. No. Hearst United States. certio- grant Brennan would denied. Certiorari VIII Questions VII and limited rari petition. Broadcasting Co., Inc.,
No. 77-1308.. National denied. Dist. Certiorari App. 1st App. Cal., Niemi. Ct. grant certiorari. Brennan Mr. Justice App. Ohio, Summit 77-1329. Ohio Ct. No. Teter. proceed forma, County. respondent denied. granted. Certiorari pauperis May App. Ind. Certiorari Ct. v. Indiana. denied. Stеwart Riley Dist. Ill., App. 1st 77-5953. Illinois.
No. denied. Certiorari Brennan with whom Mr. Marshall,
Mr. Justice dissenting. joins, Petitioner was of certiorari. from the denial dissent three in connection with time оf arrest
years old at the half in hour and a being held for an After homicides.1 peti- found, bodies were cemetery where the police car at shoes, where police station, was taken tioner blanket given and he were remоved2 and shirt trousers, being advised later, after An hour two in a placed cell. Appellate Court. the Illinois opinion of are taken from All facts appears 2d 306 E. App. undisputed years old, but police that he was first told the id., question. See the events time of 16 at the petitioner Opposition 2. 307-308, 310; Brief in E. 364 N. evidentiary purposes. apparently removed сlothing was This 2d, at 307. E. constitutional to remain silent and consult with attorney, petitioner to his who father, *2 police had cоme station when learned son’s arrest;3 by Petitioner crimes, evening repeated then confessed to the and latеr that the confession prosecuting having without con- attorney, sulted. with the parent any whom he had see or with friendly othеr adult. The confession was introduced over objection petitioner’s at which led to his conviction for trial, murder and to of 75 years.4 sentences to 225
The Illinois courts considered rejected petitioner’s argu and initially in ment, suppоrt made suppress his motion to that confession, of a a defendant parent attorney” tantamount to an adult’s рolice interrogation. and should terminate (1977).5 N. E. 2d is this argument petitioner presses that here. recently expressed my this Cоurt should view that in juvenile’s
decide whether a waiver of is valid absence of who does not have “competent advice from an adult ante,- Arkansas, Little significant conflicts of interest.” certiorari). p. 957 The instant (dissenting from denial of need presents case a for we issue, related but less difficult requires not consider here the Constitution whether testimony had petitioner’s Police claim that he conflicted with both repeatedly asked had to see his father and the fathеr’s claim that he asked however, dispute, to see his about the father’s son. There is no assumed, ruling evening, at the station thаt and the trial court motion, request to petitioner’s had made the suppression father. N. E. at murder, he received Petitioner convicted of two counts of for which years. of one concurrent 75 to 225 He was also convicted sеntences of involuntary manslaughter, he received a sentence count of which years. 3 to App. B Pet. Supremе appeal. Court denied leave to for Cert. making con- before a juvenile always receive adult adviсe ante, nn. 5-6. Nor need Compare
fession. interest is conflict of we decide whether advice tainted adult antе, purposes. sufficient for constitutional nevertheless simply here is question presented The narrow at 959-960. parent tо see a whether an accused child’s by they before continue honored station and when the is available at thе least child. interested speaking authority question conflict of on this indi-
There jurisdic- its certiorari cates a need Sup. Supreme Rule 19. The Court of Califor- tion. See nia has held: custody a minor is into and is sub- taken
“[WJhen *3 jected to without the of an attor- parents to one of his . must ney, his . . suspect
construed indicate that the minor desires to to his Fifth Amendment The privilege. invoke interrogation immediately upon cease custodial of Burton, privilege.” People the v. 6 3d 375, 383-384, Cal. 793, (1971). 491 P. 2d 798 gone further, requiring
Other state courts have always police may receive adult advice before the his accept of confession, regardless speak whether he asks an to to adult. State, g., e. Lewis v. 259 See, 431, Ind. 288 B., In K. re W. 141-143 138, (1972); 500 2d 279- 275, S. W. Webster, Commonwealth (Mo. App. 1973); 314, v. Pa. Commonwealth 372, (1975); 353 A. 2d 375-379 McCutchen, 463 Pa. A. 2d 669 On the other at least two courts addition to hand, the court below have the admission of confessions upheld juveniles’ obtained after y parents to see had been requests the b Wainwright, Chaney 2d 1129 (CA5 1977) (2-1 F. Yоung, State decision); 220 Kan. 552 P. (1976) (noting honoring juvenile’s not although practice,” “better be the parent constitutionally .6 requirеd) emphasized Gault, (1967),
In In 387 U. re S. juve- to [a must be taken assure that greatest care not the voluntary . admission was . . nile’s] [and] fright fantasy, of or of adolescent product ignorance admonition, In there despair.” light this an to honor the incongruity requiring аn obvious ignore allowing them attorney while adult’s juvenile’s request parent: police would readily state concedes that the “[T]he attorney. required been to accede to a mother rather than requests his The accused whо more attorney less knowledgeable, is the ever-available from protection in need of easily persоn coerced most protect no the police overreaching. It makes sense while coercion from knowledgeable accused stationhouse no more than who knows abandoning young person Chaney mother.” pеrson trusts, for the one to ask dissenting) Wainwright, (Goldberg, J., supra, (footnote omitted). very indicate that the issue least, considerations,
These reason, one. For a substantial federal courts among conflict state and of the because petition question, *4 A. C. et al. Franklin Shields Public Defender Wisconsin 4th Cir. granted. curiae Certiorari denied. as file a brief amicus Brennаn, White, Mr. “ similarly indicated ‘it court in the instant case sure, possible, guardian whenever to make preferable '” rights, App. 3d, 49 Ill. waives present when Stiff, quoting In re 971, 978, E.N.