.- FOFI FFLING "9 in THE COURT cs common PLEAS mun?HAR 31 2014 cuwu-Ices COUNTY, enloCASE NO. CR-539334 ll3Plaintillifnu? RIDGE T. MATIA HERNANDEZ WARREN, SUPPRESS HIS STATEMENTPEILICEDefendant. New ccrnes Defendant, Hernandez Warren, by and threugh ceunsel, andrespect?ally requests that this Hcnerahle Ceurt suppress his statement tn the police andany evidence chtaincd as a result therecf fer the reasens mere fully described in the BriefIn Support, attached herete and incorporated herein by reference.Respect??ly Submitted,DAVID L. GRANT GRANT 3.: KTMALLEY 130., LPAl3?f? Untarie St.Standard Building, Suite #1351}Cleveland, Ohie 44113-0000. . - Phene: (210) 241-0000Fax: (210) 241-5404say: .0. (6007919)6 I 4 Superier Avenue, NWRockefeller Building, Suite 130-DCleveland, Ohie 44113Phone: (216) Fax: (216) 664-6999Counsel fer DefendantHernandez Warren IN siJt3i=ort'rin Defendant seeks to suppress his nine-hots? intettogltio-n ocindue-ted by thepolice on May 13-14., 2013. This interrogation was audio-taped and primary is that the eontinuously ignored his requests to speak to an attomey during the interrogation- In addition. under a totality ?fthe eiteutnstanees analysis, the interrogation should be supptiessed became of theoo-encive tactics employed hy the police. For both of these reasons. eca?enien should be suppressed because Defertdanfs Fifth Amendment right agizrmself-ineritnination was violated.B. The only facts relevant to the instant motion are as follows In 1934, a 14-year?old gin! was murdered on the east side of Cleveland. At the time of the victinfs death,the police were unable to produce a suspect or any signi?cant leads. The case theae?orewent donnarit or ??eold"? for nearly 30 years.the Cleveland police departrnent has begun to revisit eold castesthrough DNA testing. This procedure involves comparing preserved evidence to lmoemDNA pro?les in a database loiown as CODIS. A comparison was done in this case, andDefendants DNA pro?le was matched to semen found on the victim. As I result,Defendant was charged in this case with two counts of aggravated murder. one eount ofrape, and 3 counts of kidnapping. The agg-avated murder" charges contain capital mudg-speci?cations which designates this matter as a death-penalty ease.I. I. right against tall?-lnarintlutiott wasi-ltilatad whan ill: raqualta ta apaalt ta an attaraay war: lgaarad.an his right in aaunaal. all funhar custodial intarragatianiitay nut ha raaumael in tha Ibaanca at? anuriaal the accusedtharaatiar atlbutt a wawat by himlalt? ur ranawa aammuniaatian with the patina? fife St,Jd lil92-Ghit:-64. paragraph aria til? the syllabus.?Fltiuh wliaii a aumpaut itwuliaa this: right In animal. pulitltt must li-am ?any wards atittitmita {uthar than lhcuta iiamialiy attendant it: want and custody) that the poliaalihtitthl Iititiw In aliuil an inariniinaling 151. at 4915.4405 1.1.3. 29]. 301 AI ahcwa. this mattar ia a cold aua. Culd uniqueavidatiliary Pl?hl?n?t Fur it can be aim-amaly dif?ault for a defendant toaittiihliah an alibi ha aatmat atitiuunt for when ha was on a spaci?a day 30 yearsnot Hawaw. than avidantiary pant:-lama lira nut limited In tha dafandant. The Stata isillitti with airitiantiary For aitampla. art: no longeriwltillbia, nltl-Illciria-I Ind?nr physical airidatitia is daalruyad. Becausa tzifIlttwa avidantiary tha is amaial liar the Stata in a mid ilawavar. tha impananaa af Wetting? I da?andant ta aan?ass cannot tznnan-id: hisright aall?--incriminatian.in Ilia gmaant am. that Sllta Dafandant that aim: hours our thetmurua til? darn. During thin interrogation. mada doaans of rafarmcas towanting an antlfur wanting ta ma?a a phona aall. Da?andant cannot numunt atnah aftlim in tha pmant Malian. Hawavar. attacliatl harato In Appendix A, Defendant cites just some eitarnples of his requests to spealr to anattorney andfor make a phone call. After each one of these requests, the interrogatorseither (1) lgI'ICtt'ECl the request or dissuaded Defendant from speaking to an attorney.Every police officer knows that if a defendant references a lawyer, all questioningmust cease. At the very least, when a defendant mentions a desire to speak with a lawyer,the police must inquire of tlie defendant if that is his intention. Not once was such aprocedure ful?lled hy the police. Not once after Defendant asked if he needed anattorney did the police as]: Defendant, ?Is that what you want to do, speak to a lawyer."In truth, all of Deferidanfs requests were ignored. Ignoring a request for an attorney istantamount to a denial of the request. See, ?ta_t,e v. Arnold, 4'1? Dist. No. Ohio app lenis 1332 (Mar. 30, {The appellate court agreed with the trial courtthat ?a police officer cannot mislead a suspect by indicating that he has a right to counselthen spurn such requests without creating a coercive Moreover, this continuousdisregard of consistent requests was exacerbated by the police in this case when theyattempted collectively to dissuade Defendant from speaking to an attorney.For the above reasons, Defendar1t?s right against self-incrimination was violated.Simply stated, Defendanfs requests for an attorney were ignored by the police. Ignoringthese requests renders his confession involuntary per se. Defendant therefore requeststhat his entire interrogation be suppressed horn trial.2. The totality of the clreunrstances demonstrates that Defendant'sstatement to the police was involuntary.In order for a confession to be admissible, the State must prove by apreponderance of the evidence that a defendant?s confession is voluntary. Lego v.Twoingy, 4-04 11.3. (I 9'12). In making that deterniination, a court should consider the - 1Itotality ofdte smuun-nu. sm_g,_ngm, 53 use SL211 suspect?-deesnon to Irive ls-is privilege agent: sell"-issetintittstion is rude Ilitlenten-denee thu has will turn over'ho-me and his c:q:ncity for Ie!f?detennination ?It'll oritiesllyunpaired henna?-e of eoeretve polio: eondtlet." 14 Ohio St.3d 555,. I996-?ltro-ltl. In IDD Ohi-o St.3~d SI. 55. the Ohio Cotrtelal:-arstedonthetest tbrveluntuinelszIn determining wheI.hez? I pretrial Itstetnent is involuntary, a oourt shouldconli-d-er the totality of the including the ego. mentality?.and prior criminal of the seeused; the length. intensity, andfrequency of interrogation; the esistenee of physical deprivation oroftlueat or in-duoernent.In the present ease, the totality of the must he established at aImpression hearing. However, Defertdant herein submits that the poliee used eoereivenotice that tentiler his statement was involuntary. Some of these taoties ineiude but arenot limited to: (I) ignodng requests for an attontey and a phone eall; (2)subjecting Defendant to at nearly nine-hour interrogation; (3) promising Defendantlenieney if he confesses; (4) invoking Defendant?s religious beliefs; (5) using photographs of the victim, (6) promising hint that he enn speak with his family only if heconfesses, etc. All of these ooereive taeties had a eurnulative silent on Defendantsrnindset. This euntulative effect the totality of the eireumstanoes) renderedconfession involuntary. For this reason, Defendant's statement must besuppressed from evidence at trial.13. I ON1114: Filth to the United States Constitution provides that no personshall be compelled to he witness against himself. when Defendant's requests for anattorney were ignored, he was eompellesl to teetif?)' ngiin? him??lf?l I ?"393? ?Ff 13?-Further, en ezteminntion of the totality of the circumstances and the eoereive tseties usedby the polio: render confession involuntary. For these reasons, Defendantrequests his statement be suppressed ?om nisl.Respectfully Submitted,DAVID L. GRANT GRANT ti CCL, LPADntario St.Standard Building, Suite #1359Cleveland, Ohio 441 13-0000Phone: (216) 241-6363Fast: (216) 241-5464A. STAPTION 614 Superior Avenue, NWRockefeller Building, Suite 1300Cleveland, Ohio 441 13Phone: (216) 637-0725Fax: (216) 664-6999Counsel for DefendantHernandez Warren us-I-= Defendanfs Interrogation occurred over the course of two days, May 13. 2913and May I4, 2013. If there is no indication otherwise, the statement in the quote-boa isDefendant's. If there is a and A in the quote-hos. the is followed by a statement bythe police, and the A is followed by a statement by Defendant.May 13, got;199 199 need to make ajghone call now.__ .234? 50 _I_?rn going to need a_ lawyer then? 204 I need a lawyer?2'09 I asked yes all. did I need a The way he talking, going to need . 'su1r=r- 21] Do I ?need 2153-4 your You all arresting megright? So do I need 4 they still didtft tell me do I need a lawyer because I don't want to 282-3say anything wrong. The way they coming at me, like you going home, you . - Ei?'lj0iI1E home. 290 Q: Do you want me to get some more people?-. A:Yeal1.Q: Okay.A: See if I need a lawyer or something.29?Oksr; I just want to know do I need - do I have a lawyer or something. so I could -set - -293 But that?s why I saidfdol need a lawyer?293 am?: being arrested today? When 1 leave out here, you all me melgack borne, but it don?t look like I'm going home. lt_"_s nothing so ea_n__I__r_I_1_ake a phone call? as eh I need 9 this?3018- Q: Okay. Well, I'll tell you what, I"l| give you a couple minutes while lclean upiimy stufftell me the truth. I can truly tell you, I like you. I think you're a good person. I think youhre got a good history. Did I have .:some bad times between and 30 years old. yep. Did I make some bad Imistakes, yep. There?s nothing I can do about it. Are you going to mac, itworse by not telling the truth? That's your call. I can?: make that call. All Iknow is I'm here for youlawyer. will my lawyer get contact with you??Q: Typically - I can?: give you legal advice. Typically lawyers don?t talk with. me, so and our people won't do it because at that point you've been giyu: aIt?: not a -- aini - chi. .."310I can still take theflie detector] teat alter I talk to a lawyer or something?I ?gs Quote ?i 2 . A: Iean?t talk to nobody beforeltallt to you??hia?ij?llQ: Huh??5 A: loan"t talk to nobody?No, I ean"t - I oan"t~? when you go back over there, I told them to give you aphone call, give him a phone uali.,A: I don't talk to you, I don't get no phone call?Q: Well, that my - that?s my that's my A: That?s your policy??Q: That?s my polioy 2 23-231' A: If I talk to my lawyer, talk to him?? Ito happen. I5 Q: Your lawyer can talk to me any time. I don't think it's going think that I think - you know the system. I say, you know the system. I thinkthat when the lawyer talk to me - I don?t think the lawyer is going to talk to me.I think so, out I'm willingto talk to_you with you_r__1awy5r. 29-32 A: Once you charge me, 1 get out on bond, my lawyer, Diane[his wife] you've got an of?oe here, right?YeahCan I talk dinootly to you??You can talk directly. I don't think she's going to let you, though.?Who?The lawyer, whoever, Diane.The lawyer do what I say.Okay. Iunderstand. .I understand that the lawyer is going to advise me.I honestly tlon?t think it?s going to happen.Huh?[don't think it's going to happen.It's going to happen.toihapp-on later on. Fire seen it. I hayen?t seen it I l1ayen't had that happen.uh: I don?t have to get a lawyer, do Q: I haven't had that happen -Dolhavetogetalawyer?I think what you need to do is talk to me now because I don?t thin it's going .- Q: No, but the court will appoint one for you.