State of Connecticut v. Robert John Purcell

Summary

The court held that the defendant's statements did not constitute an unequivocal invocation of counsel under the federal standard, but that the Connecticut Constitution requires police to stop and clarify an ambiguous request for counsel before continuing custodial interrogation. Because the officers continued questioning without making a permissible clarification inquiry and the state did not establish harmlessness beyond a reasonable doubt, the court reversed and ordered a new trial.