No. 22-5732
Richard Michael Arrington v. Wisconsin
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-procedure interrogation jail-informant maine-v-moulton massiah-v-united-states recording-device right-to-counsel sixth-amendment state-agent united-states-v-henry
Key Terms:
JusticiabilityDoctri
JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2022-11-04
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether, for purposes of determining if an accused's Sixth Amendment right to counsel was violated, a jail informant is considered a state agent where police expressly authorize the informant to record conversations with the accused about his pending case, equip the informant with a recording device and secure the recordings as evidence that is then used against the accused at trial.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Sixth Amendment right to counsel was violated when a jail informant recorded conversations with the accused about his pending case after being authorized and equipped by police
Docket Entries
2022-11-07
Petition DENIED.
2022-10-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/4/2022.
2022-10-04
Waiver of right of respondent Wisconsin to respond filed.
2022-09-27
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 2, 2022)
Attorneys
Richard Michael Arrington
Thomas Brady Aquino — Office of the State Public Defender, Petitioner
Wisconsin
Sara L. Shaeffer — Wisconsin Department of Justice, Respondent