PETITIONERS CONFESSION SHOULD HAVE BEEN EXCLUDED FROM EVIDENCE BECAUSE PETITIONER WAS THE VICTIM. OF MISLEADING TACTICS LEADING UP TO BEING ADVISED OF HIS MIRANDA RIGHTS AND DID NOT WAIVED HIS RIGHT TO COUNSEL^ MOREOVER, HE CONTINUED TO BE QUESTIONED AFTER INVOKING HIS RIGHT TO COUNSEL

A. Petitioner moved to exclude his confession, and that motion was denied.

B. The police improperly delayed giving Petitioner Miranda warning in order to "Soften him up" and this resulted in Petitioner's decision to speak in the officers after Warnings was given

C. Petitioner invoked his right to counsel, but was ignored and deflected..

D. Admission of the confession was prejudicial

Whether petitioner's confession should have been excluded from evidence because petitioner was the victim of misleading tactics leading up to being advised of his Miranda rights and did not waive his right to counsel, and continued to be questioned after invoking his right to counsel