Connecticut v. Barrett and the Limited Invocation of the Right to Counsel: A New Limitation of Fifth Amendment Miranda Protections

• NCJ Number: 116868
• Journal: Iowa Law Review Volume: 73 Issue: 3 Dated: (1988) Pages: 743-770
• Author(s): C J Williams
• Date Published: 1988
• Length: 27 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

Right of an accused to have an attorney present during custodial interrogation is indispensable to the effectiveness of fifth amendment privilege against self incrimination.

Abstract

The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Connecticut v. Barrett limiting the invocation of right to counsel fails to provide arrestees with adequate fifth amendment protections. The Court's decision in the Barrett case clearly shows that the accused must know their rights fully and invoke them effectively. Legal help may be necessary for the same. The article reviews the right of the accused to have counsel present during interrogation and emphasizes the duty of the police to clarify the suspect's wishes in order to ensure that the waiver is voluntary and not the result of coercion. In Barrett, the Court ruled that the police failed to clarify the suspect's request for counsel. The principles underlying the fifth amendment and Miranda protections mandate the need for the presence of counsel to shield suspects who need assistance from custodial interrogations. 217 notes.