Judge won't toss statements: Defendant did 
not clearly say he wanted a lawyer

E-mail this story

Print this story

Share

DIXON – A judge has again decided to allow into evidence the statements made by murder defendant Eric M. Lemons because he did not clearly tell police that he wanted a lawyer present during questioning.

Lemons, 28, of Ashton, is charged with three counts of first-degree murder in the death of Todd E. Harn, also 28 of Ashton, who was found dead in his apartment from a blow to the head in April.

Circuit Judge Ron Jacobson filed his decision Monday in response to a defense motion to reconsider his Aug. 4 decision to deny suppressing statements.

After reviewing the transcript of the nearly 5-hour interview between Lemons and Lee County Sheriff’s Detectives Dave Glessner and Shane Miller, Jacobson decided Lemons had not been clear when asking for a lawyer.

During the April 6 interview with police, Lemons said, “You guys think I did it, so I probably need a lawyer.”

In his decision, Jacobson noted that Glessner immediately sought to clarify the statement by saying “You don’t want to talk anymore?”

In response to Glessner’s question, Lemons “did not take advantage of the opportunity to clearly say that he wanted a lawyer.” Instead, he responded with “I don’t know what to tell you, man.”

“A reasonable person in Detective Glessner and Detective Miller’s position would not see these words from the defendant as a clear invocation of his right to speak with an attorney,” Jacobson wrote.

Lemons’ attorney, Lee County Public Defender Bob Thompson, said Monday that he respected Jacobson’s decision and would continue to move forward with the case.

What’s next

Murder defendant Eric M. Lemons will appear in court Oct. 1 on a motion to preclude the death penalty.

According to the motion filed by Lee County Public Defender Bob Thompson, prosecutors have not met the deadline to tell the court whether they plan to seek the death penalty, and no “good cause” has been shown to extend the deadline.

About Miranda rights

The Miranda rule was developed to protect an individual’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. It ensures that a person in custody realizes he does not have to talk to police, and that he has the right to have an attorney present during questioning.

Police generally read these rights to a person upon arrest:

“You have the right to remain silent. If you give up the right to remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you desire an attorney and cannot afford one, an attorney will be obtained for you before police questioning.”

If the Miranda warning is not given before questioning, or if police continue to question a suspect after he indicates, in any manner, a desire to consult with an attorney before speaking, statements by the suspect generally are inadmissible at trial and cannot be used against the suspect.

Source: The American Bar Association