Lexplug logoLexplug

Commonwealth v. Mavredakis

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
430 Mass. 848 (2000)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

Under Article 12 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights, police have an affirmative duty to immediately stop an interrogation and inform a suspect of an attorney's efforts to provide legal assistance, regardless of whether the suspect has requested a lawyer. Failure to do so renders any subsequent waiver of rights inoperative and makes any resulting statements inadmissible.


Facts:

  • Edward Baladinakis (Eddie) worked at a Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC) restaurant in West Springfield.
  • Around midnight on August 11, 1995, Eddie's brother, Emmanuel (John), his friend Carlo Siniscalchi, and the defendant met Eddie after his shift.
  • The group discussed breaking into the KFC; John, Siniscalchi, and the defendant decided to proceed with the plan.
  • John and the defendant entered the KFC using John's old set of keys while Siniscalchi waited in the car.
  • While they were inside taking money from the safe, the shift supervisor, Thomas Henson, unexpectedly returned to the restaurant.
  • Henson was shot five times and killed.
  • The defendant and John took approximately $1,000, receipts, a police scanner, and a towel before fleeing the scene.
  • They later met up with Siniscalchi and hid the stolen items and the murder weapon in the defendant's cellar.

Procedural Posture:

  • The defendant was brought to the police station for questioning regarding the murder of Thomas Henson.
  • While the defendant was being interrogated, his family retained an attorney, who called the station at 10:15 p.m. and was denied access to the defendant.
  • A second attorney arrived at the station at 10:30 p.m. but was also prevented from seeing the defendant.
  • The defendant made inculpatory statements after the attorneys' attempts to contact him.
  • The defendant filed a motion in the Superior Court (trial court) to suppress the statements he made to police.
  • The trial court judge denied the motion to suppress.
  • Following a jury trial, the defendant was convicted of murder in the first degree, armed robbery, breaking and entering, and illegal possession of a firearm.
  • The defendant appealed his convictions to the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, the state's highest court.

Locked

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does Article 12 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights require police to inform a suspect in custody of an attorney's efforts to provide legal assistance, even if the suspect has not requested an attorney?


Opinions:

Majority - Ireland, J.

Yes. Article 12 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights requires police to inform a suspect of an attorney's efforts to contact him for the purpose of providing legal advice. The court held that the right against self-incrimination under the state constitution is broader than the protection afforded by the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, as interpreted in Moran v. Burbine. A suspect's waiver of Miranda rights cannot be truly knowing and intelligent if police conceal the fact that a specific attorney, retained on the suspect's behalf, is immediately available to provide assistance. The court reasoned that there is a significant difference between the abstract right to counsel mentioned in Miranda warnings and a concrete opportunity to consult with an identified attorney. By failing to inform the defendant of his attorneys' calls and presence at the station, the police rendered his subsequent waiver of rights inoperative, and all statements made after the first attorney's call at 10:15 p.m. must be suppressed.



Analysis:

This decision establishes a significant departure from federal constitutional law under Moran v. Burbine, which held that police have no duty under the Fifth Amendment to inform a suspect of an attorney's efforts to reach them. By grounding its decision in the broader protections of Article 12 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights, the court created a higher standard for law enforcement conduct within the Commonwealth. The ruling establishes a bright-line rule that prioritizes a suspect's access to counsel over police interrogation tactics, reinforcing the principle that a waiver of constitutional rights must be fully informed. This precedent makes it more difficult for prosecutors in Massachusetts to use confessions obtained after an attorney has attempted to intervene, thereby strengthening the attorney-client relationship at a critical stage of a criminal investigation.

G

Gunnerbot

AI-powered case assistant

Loaded: Commonwealth v. Mavredakis (2000)

Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"