State Supreme Court sends Dothan case back to appeals court

The Alabama Supreme Court has sent a Dothan case back to an appeals court based on a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling it says “changes the legal landscape” in regards to when criminal defendants have an absolute right to legal counsel.

The case involves Davian Rashaud Cooper, who was arrested July 27, 2006, and charged with several counts of first-degree robbery. On the same day, Cooper was read his Miranda rights, agreed in writing to waive his right to an attorney and made two statements to police. Cooper made his first appearance before a judge the next day and was appointed an attorney.

Four days later on Aug. 1, Cooper made a third statement to police and confessed to the robberies. He was indicted three months later. Before trial, the attorney for Cooper argued that his third statement to police should not be allowed as evidence because an attorney had been appointed to represent him when he made the Aug. 1 statement, and his Sixth Amendment right to have counsel present while he was interviewed was violated.

The local trial judge denied the motion and admitted the third statement. Cooper was convicted of four counts of first-degree robbery and sentenced to 25 years in prison for each conviction.

On appeal, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals upheld the local court’s ruling. However, a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling has led the Alabama Supreme Court to send the case back to the appeals court to determine if Cooper knowingly waived his right to counsel before giving the third statement.

The. U.S. Supreme Court case involves a Louisiana man charged with first-degree murder who had been assigned an attorney and made his first appearance in court. Later, while still in jail, the man was approached by police and asked if he would accompany them to locate the murder weapon. He agreed, and while en route, wrote a letter to the victim’s widow that implicated him in the crime. The man’s attorney argued that the letter should not be admitted into evidence because the police request to accompany them to locate the murder weapon constituted a “critical stage” in the state’s prosecution against him and thus, he had a right to have an attorney present. The U.S. Supreme Court agreed.

“Our decision to overrule (previous law) has changed the legal landscape,” the Alabama Supreme Court wrote in the Cooper case. “The police interrogation of Cooper on August 1 was a ‘critical stage’ in the criminal prosecution of the robbery offenses, and Cooper, absent a valid waiver (of rights), had the right to have counsel present at the interrogation regarding those offenses.”

The Alabama Supreme Court went on to say that the appeals court must now determine if Cooper knowingly waived his right to an attorney before making his third statement to police.