Brian Fayne v. Virginia

The police must immediately cease questioning a suspect who invokes his right to counsel. Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 (1981). The State conceded at every stage of the proceedings that Petitioner Fayne unequivocally invoked his right to counsel and that the police continued to interrogate him for approximately ninety minutes in violation of Edwards. Seconds after police left the room, Fayne knocked on the door and indicated that he was willing to talk to the investigators, leading to incriminating statements. The Supreme Court of Virginia held that Edwards only requires that the questioning cease, and that the failure to honor Fayne’s invocation was not relevant to the analysis as to whether the interrogation ultimately ceased. The court did not inquire as to whether the reinitiation was the result of the violation. The Question Presented is: Whether, after police continue interrogating a suspect in violation of Edwards v. Arizona despite his unequivocal invocation of counsel, the State may rely solely on the suspect's subsequent reinitiation of communication to admit his statements, or whether the Fifth Amendment requires the State to establish that the suspect’s reinitiation and subsequent waiver were not the product of the unlawful interrogation.