Anthony Darrell Heath v. Kathy Brittain, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution at Frackville, et al.

Was Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S. Ct. 1602, 16 L. Ed. 2d 694

decided for that specific class of persons "not mentally ill" that is, not suffering from a clinically recognized mental health disorder and/or condition.

For the specific class of persons who are mentally ill, and suffering from a recognized clinical mental health disorder at time of a custodial police interrogation, does the traditional Miranda warnings stand fair honest and true to meaningfully protect a mentally ill person's Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment United States Constitutional Right via the appointment and assistance of counsel in order to make a true knowing, and intelligent waiver of a fundamental right to remain silent and have the appointment and assistance of counsel during the custodial police interrogation?

And must the appointment and assistance of counsel be provided to a mentally ill person before any custodial police interrogation if such person who falls into this specific class (suffering from mental illness) indicates in any manner prior to custodial police interrogation that their expering a mental health crisis; shall counsel be provided in light of this critical circumstance especially when such person is otherwise legally entitled to the appointment and assistance of counsel?

If the appointment and assistance of counsel is not present during a custodial police interrogation against a person who is mentally ill, were such mentally ill person's Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights violated?