State v. Maharg (Concurrence)

Summary

Justice McDonald, joined by Justices D’Auria and Ecker, concurs in affirming the conviction because the trial court properly suppressed the defendant’s statements from the approximately thirteen-hour interrogation. The concurrence emphasizes that the police recklessly continued questioning a visibly ill defendant undergoing alcohol withdrawal, despite his repeated requests for help and termination of the interview. It warns that exclusion of the statements may not by itself sufficiently deter similar misconduct. Justice McDonald, concurring, would not alter the judgment but urges stronger institutional safeguards against police violations of constitutional rights and state policy.