Superfluous Sotomayor – Maryland v Shatzer
In her first week on the bench, Supreme Court Justice Sonya Sotomayor is anything but a shrinking violet. In true New Yorker fashion, she was inquisitively vocal. Sotomayor rivaling Scalia asked a litany of questions. The case on the docket is Maryland v Shatzer.
Shatzer
Mr. Shatzer, the respondent in this case, was serving a prison sentence on an unrelated crime when a detective first interviewed him. When the detective read Mr. Shatzer his Miranda rights, Mr. Shatzer responded that he wanted an attorney present while the detective asked him questions. The detective wrote in his report, “When I attempted to again initiate the interview, he told me that he would not talk about this case without having an attorney present.” The detective then terminated the interview and closed the case. Two years and seven months later, though, a different detective conducted a follow-up investigation. That detective read Mr. Shatzer his Miranda rights and then — without allowing Mr. Shatzer any access to an attorney — interrogated him. Mr. Shatzer then confessed that he had committed a crime.
Although she’s the newest justice, Sotomayor peppered the arguing lawyers with as many questions as her eight more experienced colleagues. Sotomayor even jockeyed to get in her questions at the same time as both Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg – the court’s other female justice — although both times she deferred to the more experienced justice.
When researching this story I found what amounts to a prison Facebook page/blog for the respondent Michael Shatzer. You’ll have to see this to believe it. The site is called friends beyond the walls . SMH!
