By Brian Witte, The Associated Press
Baltimore (AP) -- Attorney General J. Joseph Curran said Wednesday his office will ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the dismissal of a case against a homicide suspect who was released from jail this week.
Leeander J. Blake, 19, was released Tuesday after the first-degree murder case against him crumbled amid allegations that his Miranda rights were violated.
Curran, however, contends Blake’s rights were not violated and that the case should go to trial.
“We just feel that the facts in this case do not indicate a violation of his Miranda rights, and we’d like the Supreme Court to have a chance to agree or disagree with us,” Curran said. “We hope that they agree with us.”
The state has almost three months to file with the high court.
Kenneth Ravenell, Blake’s attorney, said he wasn’t surprised by Curran’s decision.
“We are confident that the Court of Appeals’ unanimous decision is correct and we’ll obviously be prepared to meet the challenge,” Ravenell said.
Blake and Terrence Tolbert were charged with the murder of Straughan Lee Griffin, who was shot in the head Sept. 19, 2002 as he was unloading groceries from his car in a downtown neighborhood near the state capitol in Annapolis. He was apparently run over with his sport utility vehicle as the attackers sped away.
Tolbert is awaiting trial for the killing of Griffin.
Blake, who was 17 at the time, initially refused to talk to police when he was arrested and taken to jail, wearing only a tank top and boxer shorts. When a police officer delivered a copy of the charging documents listing death as a possible penalty, another officer told Blake, “I bet you want to talk now, huh?”
After the officer made the comment, a detective said police could not talk to Blake.
About half an hour later, Blake told police he did want to talk to them and made incriminating statements about the murder without consulting a lawyer.
In May, the Court of Appeals ruled that incriminating statements made by Blake couldn’t be used at his trial. In the ruling, the state’s highest court upheld the decision by Circuit Judge Pamela North, who had held that the statements were inadmissible because they were made after Blake invoked his constitutional right to be represented by a lawyer before talking to police.
The Court of Appeals rejected arguments by prosecutors that Blake voluntarily gave up his right to remain silent after he received a copy of the charging document.
The appeals court noted that the document said Blake was eligible for the death penalty even though he could not be executed because state law prohibits capital punishment for anyone who is under age 18 when a crime is committed.
The comment, “I bet you want to talk now, huh,” was a functional equivalent of interrogation, the appeals court said.
But Curran said Blake’s rights weren’t violated, because a detective immediately warned the officer that police couldn’t interrogate Blake after he asked for a lawyer.
“We believe that 28 minutes after he said he wanted a lawyer he then willingly changed his mind and said ‘I’ll talk to you now,”’ Curran said. “And that statement, if we’re correct, should be admitted.”
Curran said he expected the case to be filed with the Supreme Court in about two months. After that, the state probably wouldn’t learn if the court will hear the case until November.
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court refused to require special treatment for young people under questioning by police, ruling narrowly against a 17-year-old who was interrogated for two hours without being told of his rights.
The Supreme Court has two more Miranda cases to decide before they end their term in the next month. They involve how much leeway police have when they mistakenly or deliberately fail to tell suspects their rights.