Suppression of Statements

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Johnnie Wesley v. Randall Hepp

Case No.: 22-2968

Officials: Easterbrook, Wood, and Kirsch, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Suppression of Statements

Wesley was brought in by Wisconsin police for questioning in connection with a murder investigation and initially exercised his right to remain silent, leading to the cessation of the first interrogation. However, he underwent two subsequent interrogations during which he made self-incriminating statements regarding the murder. Wesley was charged with felony murder, and he sought to suppress the incriminating statements on two grounds: (1) the officers’ failure to honor his initial invocation of the right to remain silent, and (2) his unequivocal invocation of the right during the third interrogation. Despite Wesley’s efforts, the motion was denied, resulting in his conviction. He then sought a writ of habeas corpus in the Eastern District of Wisconsin, but the petition was dismissed.

Upon appealing, the Seventh Circuit concluded that the Wisconsin Court of Appeals had reasonably applied Supreme Court precedent to Wesley’s case. The court found that Wesley’s right to remain silent had been “scrupulously honored” after he invoked it during the initial interrogation. Furthermore, it determined that Wesley did not unequivocally invoke his right to remain silent during the third interrogation. The court concluded that Wesley’s statements in the third interrogation could reasonably be interpreted as exculpatory rather than as an explicit invocation of silence.

Affirmed.

Decided 01/05/24

Full Text