Blake v. State, 381 Md. 218

Summary

The Maryland Court of Appeals considered whether police conduct constituted the functional equivalent of interrogation after Leeander Jerome Blake invoked his Miranda right to counsel. The court held that an officer’s statement, made while serving Blake with charging documents incorrectly indicating death-penalty exposure, was reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response and violated Miranda and Edwards. The court upheld suppression of Blake’s subsequent statements, including statements made during a later polygraph examination.

Holdings

1. After Blake invoked his right to counsel, Officer Reese's statement, made in conjunction with the delivery of charging documents falsely indicating that Blake faced the death penalty, constituted the functional equivalent of custodial interrogation.
2. Blake did not legally initiate further communication with the police because his question was a direct response to the preceding unlawful interrogation and coercive circumstances.
3. The subsequent re-advisement and waiver of Miranda rights did not cure the prior police-initiated interrogation or render Blake's later statements admissible.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Officer Reese's statement, made after Blake invoked his right to counsel and while officers presented him with charging documents incorrectly stating that he faced the death penalty, was the functional equivalent of custodial interrogation under Miranda and Edwards.
2. Whether Blake's later question, "I can still talk to you?", constituted initiation of further communication sufficient to permit a valid waiver of his previously invoked right to counsel.
3. Whether Detective Johns's warning that the officers could not talk to Blake, followed by a twenty-eight-minute delay and renewed Miranda warnings, cured the earlier Edwards violation.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded