Fare v. Michael C.
Facts
Police took 16 1/2-year-old Michael C., who was on juvenile probation and had prior experience with the juvenile justice system, into custody for questioning about a murder. After being fully advised of his Miranda rights, he asked, "Can I have my probation officer here?"; the officers said they would not call the probation officer then, reminded him of his right to an attorney and to remain silent, and Michael then said he wanted to talk. He made incriminating statements and sketches, and in juvenile proceedings he moved to suppress them on the ground that his request for his probation officer invoked his Fifth Amendment rights.
Issue
Does a juvenile's request during custodial interrogation to speak with his probation officer constitute a per se invocation of the Fifth Amendment rights protected by Miranda, requiring interrogation to cease? If not, are the juvenile's later statements admissible based on a valid waiver under the totality of the circumstances?
Rule
Miranda's per se rule applies when the accused requests an attorney or indicates a wish to remain silent. A juvenile's request for a probation officer is not tantamount to a request for counsel and is not, by itself, a per se invocation of the right to remain silent; instead, admissibility depends on whether, under the totality of the circumstances, the juvenile knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived the rights to remain silent and to counsel.
See the holding & full analysis
Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.
- The court's holding and reasoning
- Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
- 10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case
Test yourself
If Devin moves to suppress his statements solely because he asked for his probation officer, how should the court rule?