Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

408 So. 2d 201

Lowe v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama

Decided December 29, 1981

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · decided 1981-12-29

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently January 1991

2 state decisions

Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Square v. State · 50 Ala. App. 526 - Marcus v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1981-12-29

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

BOOKOUT, Judge.

¶1Robbery, first degree; sentence: twenty years’ imprisonment.

¶2The appellant’s inculpatory statement was admitted into evidence over his motion to suppress and his objection that the Miranda 1 warning given him was incomplete and thus defective. The Attorney General tacitly admits error by filing the following statement with this court:

“Due to the Miranda predicate laid below, the State respectfully declines to submit a brief in the above styled case.”

¶3The purported Miranda warning given to the appellant in the instant case did not apprise him “that if he cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed for him prior to any questioning.” Miranda, 384 U.S. at 479, 86 S.Ct. at 1630. Such omission rendered the warning defective. Marcus v. State, 50 Ala.App. 526, 280 So.2d 786, 291 Ala. 350, 280 So.2d 793 (1973); Square v. State, 283 Ala. 548, 219 So.2d 377 (1968). The appellant’s motion to suppress the statement should have been granted.

¶4REVERSED AND REMANDED.

All the Judges concur.

¶5. Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966).

/408/so2d/201 · .json · Public domain