The Lawyer Request and the First Sergeant's Ride
On 12 March, CID Agent P. interviews Sgt. M. about the theft of $4,800 from the unit coffee fund. The interview begins at 1015 in a CID interview room. Agent P. reads Article 31(b) rights from DA Form 3881, and M. signs the waiver at 1020. At 1035, after a question about a deposit bag, M. says, 'I think I need a lawyer.' Agent P. stops, clarifies that M. wants counsel, ends the interview at 1038, and documents the invocation. On 14 March at 1400, M.'s first sergeant brings him to the CID office and says, 'He's ready to talk; I told him it would go better for him if he cooperated.' M. says, 'I've been thinking about it. I want to get this off my chest.' Agent P. re-advises M., who waives and confesses to taking $2,300, not $4,800, to pay a gambling debt. The interview lasts 1 hour 10 minutes with one break. M. is 20 years old and has no prior CID interview.
1. Was M.'s confession obtained lawfully? Analyze the invocation, reinitiation, and waiver, including the first sergeant's statement.
Read the worked answer
After M. said he needed a lawyer, Agent P. correctly stopped. Under the military rules and Edwards v. Arizona, once a suspect invokes counsel, the government may not interrogate him further unless the suspect himself initiates a conversation and knowingly and intelligently waives the right. M.'s statement on 14 March could be reinitiation, but the first sergeant's statement - 'I told him it would go better for him if he cooperated' - is an implied promise of leniency and may have induced the waiver. The first sergeant is part of the command and was acting as a conduit to CID. The agent should have separated M. from the first sergeant, asked exactly what was said, and clarified that no promises could be made. The totality - a 20-year-old with no prior CID experience, a lawyer request two days earlier, and a command-induced statement - makes the waiver vulnerable. The confession may still be admissible if the government proves M. initiated and the waiver was voluntary, but the agent should not assume it. Notify trial counsel and corroborate with financial records.
2. What documentation should Agent P. create, and what should he avoid writing?
Read the worked answer
Document the first interview with exact times: rights read at 1015, waiver at 1020, the lawyer request at 1035, clarification, and termination at 1038. Use DA Form 3881 and a narrative that quotes M.'s words. Record the 14 March interview: who was present, when the first sergeant spoke, the exact statement, when the agent re-advised, the waiver, breaks, and duration. Note M.'s age and experience. Do not write boilerplate such as 'the subject voluntarily waived all rights' unless the facts support it; do not omit the first sergeant's statement; do not characterize it as harmless; do not write conclusions about guilt. Avoid words like 'confessed' in the heading; state what M. said. Keep rough notes and do not rewrite them later. If the agent made a mistake, document it; the report must be accurate, not persuasive.
3. M. now says, 'I only said that because the first sergeant told me I'd be chaptered if I didn't.' What should the agent do?
Read the worked answer
This is a claim that the confession was coerced. The agent should stop the interview, not argue with M., and re-advise him under Article 31(b). He should ask M. to explain what the first sergeant said, when, and who else was present, and record it verbatim. If M. asks for counsel, stop. The agent should notify the supervisor and trial counsel immediately, preserve all notes and the DA Form 3881, and not promise M. anything to keep the statement. He should investigate the first sergeant's conduct and document it. The statement may be involuntary and inadmissible; the agent should not try to 're-interview' M. to clean it up. Corroborate the $2,300 with bank records, gambling records, and the fund's ledger. The integrity of the process is more important than the confession.