This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Burbine (D) was arrested with two others on a breaking and entering charge. Information from a confidential informant and from the two others arrested with D led police to consider D a suspect in a murder that occurred in Providence several months earlier. At 6:00 P.M., Cranston police called Providence police, who arrived at about 7:00 P.M. to question D about the murder. D's sister called the Public Defender's Office at 7:45 P.M. to obtain counsel for D on the breaking and entering charge. She unsuccessfully tried to reach the attorney representing D on another unrelated charge but reached another public defender. At 8:15 P.M., the public defender called the Cranston police and asked for the detectives. She stated that D was represented by an attorney who wasn't available and said that she would act as D's attorney if he was placed in a lineup or questioned. The police said that D would not be questioned that night. D was not informed of this conversation. An hour later, police began to interrogate D in a series of interviews. Before each session, D was informed of his Miranda rights, and on three occasions, he signed written waivers, indicating that he did not want an attorney called or appointed to him. D had access to but did not use the phone in the interrogation room. D signed three statements confessing to the murder. The trial court denied D's motion to suppress the statements, and D was found guilty of murder. The Rhode Island Supreme Court affirmed. On federal habeas corpus, the 1st Circuit reversed the District Court, holding that the police conduct had prevented D from knowingly and intelligently waiving his rights. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.