DAVON WALLACE v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, Moylan, June 4, 2018,
6th Amendment – A murder defendant does not have a Sixth-Amendment right to an attorney until he is either indicted by the Grand Jury or a Criminal Information is filed by the State’s Attorney. A Court Commissioner arrest warrant isn’t enough.

Ignoring Moylan’s fun little foray into the world of homicide since, as he notes, it’s all dicta

Facts:
On August 10, 2014, a three-year-old was killed in PG County. Police obtained an arrest warrant from the Court Commissioner that same day. Meanwhile, Davon Wallace hired an attorney to represent him in the murder case.
Wallace’s attorney spoke to prosecutors about the case and told them that Wallace would turn himself in on August 12.
Instead, Wallace fled to DC where he was arrested on September 16, 2014. Wallace was transported to the Metropolitan Police Department and interrogated there by detectives from PG County. In that interrogation, he gave a statement linking him to the killing of the child.
When a detective began to tell Wallace about his Miranda rights, Wallace said, “I already know these things. Y’all know I got a lawyer too, right?” The detective responded, “Yeah. No, we know that.” Detectives did not attempt to contact Wallace’s attorney. The detectives Mirandized Wallace and asked him to give his “version of what happened.” Wallace responded, “I already told my version,” to “my lawyer.”
Wallace continued speaking with detectives and gave a taped statement with information linking him to the death of the child.
Wallace was indicted for the murder by the Grand Jury on November 18, 2014.
Prior to trial, Wallace tried to have his statement suppressed. The trial judge denied this request and Wallace was subsequently convicted of murder.
Wallace appealed, arguing that police violated his 6th Amendment right by interrogating him without his attorney present after arresting him based on a District Court Commissioner’s arrest warrant.

Held: The Court of Special Appeals held that the Court Commissioner’s warrant wasn’t a formal charging document for a murder charge and therefore no 6th Amendment rights had attached yet. Because there were no 5th Amendment or Miranda issues brought up, the confession was properly admitted.

6th Amendment – “In all criminal prosecutions,

the accused

shall enjoy the right… to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”

6th Amendment- The 6th Amendment doesn’t apply, however, until the defendant has become “the accused” “by way of formal charge, preliminary hearing, indictment, information, or arraignment.”

6th Amendment – Hiring a lawyer does not automatically give the suspect 6th amendment rights; he doesn’t get that until he is formally charged

6th Amendment – Murder is a felony not within the jurisdiction of the District Court, so a District Court Commissioner’s arrest warrant is not a “formal charge” that would give a defendant 6th Amendment protection.

From the Case: Wallace did not “become an ‘accused’ on August 10, 2014. He did not become an ‘accused’ until he was indicted on November 18, 2014.” Therefore, he did not have any 6th Amendment rights on September 16 when detectives interrogated him.

6th Amendment – Police may not even attempt to interrogate a defendant about a crime once the defendant has been formally charged with that crime (without the defendant’s attorney present).

Note: The suspect still has his Miranda and 5th-Amendment rights. He has the absolute right to speak with his attorney prior to interrogation and have that attorney present with him during interrogation. The difference between Miranda and the 6th Amendment is that Miranda gives the defendant the right to have his attorney present with him during interrogation

if he makes that request

. The 6th Amendment, on the other hand, prohibits police from even trying to interrogate a defendant without his attorney present.

Practice Note: While police cannot interrogate the suspect about a crime where he has been formally charged (unless the defendant’s attorney is present), police can still attempt to question the suspect about other crimes not directly related to the charged crime. Again, however, keep in mind that a suspect always has his Miranda Rights and must waive those rights prior to answering questions (one of which is the right to have his attorney present with him during interrogation).

From the Case: “In this case, there was no violation of the appellant’s Sixth Amendment constitutional right because the right allegedly violated did not exist.” Therefore, the confession was properly admitted into evidence.