Georgia Criminal Lawyer Blog

The 1966 decision in Miranda v. Arizona has been narrowed in a 5-4 opinion by the Supreme Court.  Van Chester Thompkins, Jr., was convicted of murder and is serving life in prison without parole.  Thompkins was captured more than a year after the shooting that resulted in his conviction.  He was questioned by detectives for almost three hours.  There was no dispute he was given his Miranda warnings at the beginning of the questioning.  However Thompkins did not say that he wanted to remain silent or that he did not want to talk with police.

Near the end of the questioning, one officer asked Thompkins whether he believed in God and he said “yes.”  The officer then asked “do you pray to God?”  Again Thompkins responded “yes.”  The officer asked, “do you pray to God to forgive you for shooting that boy down?”  Thompkins said “yes” and then looked away.  He refused to make a written confession and he refused to sign a Miranda waiver form.  The one word confession was used at Thompkins’ trial and he was convicted.

Having lost his appeal in state court, Thompkins’ conviction was eventually overturned in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit which ruled that Thompkins had not waived his right to silence,  The Court found that Thompkins’ continued silence through the almost three hour long interview indicated that he did not want to waive his rights.

Justice Kennedy, writing for the majority, said that wasn’t enough.  Kennedy concluded that “Thompkins did not say that he wanted to remain silent or that he did not want to talk to police.  Had he made either of these simple, unambiguous statements, he would have invoked his ‘right to cut off questioning’.  Here he did neither, so he did not invoke his right to remain silent.”

Berghuis v. Thompkins opinion available here