United States v. Irene Rubio Garcia
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Irene Rubio GARCIA, Appellant
Opinion
PER CURIAM:
Defendant Garcia appeals from a conviction for violating 21 U.S.C. § 174 . Error in admitting Garcia’s inculpatory statements obtained in violation of Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 , compels reversal of her conviction and a remand for a new trial from which those statements will be excluded.
After Garcia was arrested, federal agents repeatedly questioned her. During the course of the interrogation sessions, the agents gave her several different versions of the Miranda bundle of warnings. On no occasion was a warning given fully complying with Miranda .
Taken together, the warnings were inconsistent. At one point she was told that she had a right to the presence of counsel “when she answered any questions”; on another, she was told that she could “have an attorney appointed to represent you when you first appear before the U. S. Commissioner or the Court.”
The warnings failed adequately to inform Garcia of her right to counsel before she said a word. “[T]he offer of counsel must be clarion and firm, not one of mere impressionism.” Lathers v. United States (5th Cir. 1968) 396 F.2d 524, 535 . (Accord, United States v. Vasquez-Lopez (9th Cir. 1968) 400 F.2d 593 ; Gilpin v. United States (5th Cir. 1969) 415 F.2d 638 .)
Discussion of the remaining contentions is rendered unnecessary by our disposition of the Miranda issue.
The judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded for a new trial.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 2 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(warning stated that accused could have “an attorney appointed to represent you when you first appear before the U.S. Commissioner or the Court”)
-
(conviction reversed because defendant given several different versions of “Miranda bundle of warnings,” none completely correct; warnings “[t]aken together . . . were inconsistent” and, thus, inadequate)
Cited by 38 cases
View all citing references →- U.S. Supreme Court3
- U.S. Courts of Appeals12
- Federal District Courts3
- State Highest Courts11
- State Appellate Courts8
- State Trial Courts1
Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.