State v. Piatnitsky

Summary

The Washington Supreme Court considers whether Samuel Piatnitsky unequivocally invoked his Miranda right to remain silent by stating, "I don't want to talk right now," while indicating that he would write his statement instead. The court holds that, viewed in context, the statement was at most an equivocal invocation because Piatnitsky expressed a preference for a written rather than audio-recorded confession, and it affirms admission of the written statement and the judgment below. Justice Wiggins dissents, concluding that Piatnitsky clearly invoked a limited right not to speak and that the police failed to honor that invocation.

Holdings

1. Piatnitsky did not unequivocally invoke his Miranda right to remain silent. Viewed in context, his statements were at most an equivocal or conditional invocation expressing a preference to write rather than speak or make an audio recording.
2. The trial court properly admitted Piatnitsky's written confession because his statements did not constitute an unequivocal invocation requiring the detectives to terminate the interrogation.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Piatnitsky unequivocally invoked his Fifth Amendment and Miranda right to remain silent when he said, "I don't want to talk right now" while also stating that he would write his account down.
2. Whether the detectives were required to cease questioning or clarify Piatnitsky's intent before obtaining a written confession.

Disposition

affirmed