Florida v. Powell
Holding
Criminal suspects have a right to have their lawyer present during police questioning, and the police are required to inform suspects of that right as part of their Miranda warning. In this case, police officers told a suspect that he had the right to talk to a lawyer before answering [any] questions? and [y]ou have the right to use any of these rights at any time you want during this interview. The Court held that even though this warning did not specifically mention the right to have a lawyer present during questioning (as opposed to the right to talk to the lawyer before questioning), the warning nonetheless was constitutional because it conveyed to the suspect that he had the right to have an attorney present.
Judgment
Reversed and remanded, 7-2, in an opinion by Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Feb 23, 2010. Justice Ginsburg wrote the majority opinion, while Justice Stevens, joined in part by Justice Breyer, wrote in dissent.
Merits Briefs
- Brief for Petitioner State of Florida
- Brief for Respondent Kevin Dewayne Powell
- Reply Brief for Petitioner State of Florida
Amicus Briefs
- Brief for the United States of America in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for the Florida Public Defender Association, Inc., in Support of Respondent
- Brief for the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Support of Respondent
- Brief for Professor Richard A. Leo in Support of Respondent
- Brief for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the National Association of Federal Defenders in Support of Respondent
[##CERT-STAGE##]
Recommended Citation: Florida v. Powell, SCOTUSblog, https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/florida-v-powell/