Davis v. United States (1990)

Davis v. United States, 494 U.S. 505 (1990), is a landmark United States Supreme Court case concerning the Fifth Amendment right to counsel during custodial interrogation. The case clarified the standard required for a suspect to invoke their Miranda rights after initially waiving them.

Prior to Davis, the courts grappled with what constituted an adequate invocation of the right to counsel after a waiver. Some circuits applied a "clarification approach," requiring police to clarify ambiguous requests for counsel. Others adopted a "strict scrutiny" approach, requiring an unequivocal and unambiguous assertion of the right.

The Supreme Court in Davis rejected both of these approaches and established a clear, objective standard: law enforcement officers are not required to stop questioning a suspect unless the suspect unambiguously requests an attorney. The Court reasoned that a less stringent standard would unduly hamper effective law enforcement. If a suspect makes a statement that is ambiguous or equivocal regarding their desire for counsel, the officers are not required either to cease questioning or to clarify whether the suspect actually wants an attorney.

The facts of the case involved a naval investigative agent who interrogated a suspect, Davis, about the murder of a sailor. Davis initially waived his Miranda rights. About an hour and a half into the interview, Davis stated, "Maybe I should talk to a lawyer." The agents then asked Davis if he was requesting a lawyer, and he responded that he was not. The interrogation continued, and Davis eventually made statements implicating himself in the murder.

The Supreme Court upheld the admissibility of Davis's statements, finding that his initial statement, "Maybe I should talk to a lawyer," was not a clear and unambiguous request for counsel. The Court emphasized that to invoke the right to counsel after a waiver, a suspect must articulate their desire to have counsel present "sufficiently clearly that a reasonable police officer in the circumstances would understand the statement to be a request for an attorney."

Davis v. United States remains a significant precedent in Fifth Amendment jurisprudence, providing a bright-line rule for law enforcement regarding invocation of the right to counsel during custodial interrogation. It underscores the importance of clear communication and establishes a standard that seeks to balance the rights of the suspect with the needs of law enforcement.