In February 2005, nine-year-old Jessica Lansford was abducted, raped, and buried alive (Associated Press, 2007). John Couey, a convicted sex-offender, was deemed a person of interest given his residence's close proximity to the Lansford home and a shovel near a disturbed patch of his yard (Associated Press, 2006). During an interrogation in March 2005, Couey confessed to his crimes as well as revealed the location of Lansford's body. However, due to the detectives' blatant and deliberate disregard of Couey's requests for counsel, the confession was deemed inadmissible by the presiding judge (Associated Press, 2006). Throughout his interrogation, Couey expressed the desire to speak with a lawyer but was never granted access to one. The brazen police misconduct in violating an individual's Sixth Amendment right to counsel warranted dismissal of the confession; there no mere technicality or question of Couey's invocation of his right to counsel as he requested a lawyer "eight times in 46 seconds" (Associated Press, 2006). …show more content…
Howard's decision removes an avenue of appeal and permits the use of Lansford's recovered remains through the inevitable discovery doctrine (Harr, Hess, Orthmann, and Kingsbury; 2015). Though not the most popular decision, Howard's reasoning behind the suppression of the confession was sound: "cases involving the death penalty require the closest judicial scrutiny" (Filan,