Harden v. Indiana
Indiana Supreme Court
576 N.E.2d 590 (1991)
- Written by Meredith Hamilton Alley, JD
Facts
Mark Lewis Harden (defendant) was 17 years old when he robbed and raped a woman and beat her to death. The police took Harden into custody for questioning and placed him in an interrogation room at around 2:00 p.m. According to Harden, he was cold, hungry, and distraught while he waited for the interrogation. Harden asked to speak to his father. and the police allowed the father and Harden to have a 20-minute conversation in private at around 6:00 p.m. Harden’s father told him that the matter would be easier for Harden if he talked to the police. Because of his distress, Harden was unable to say anything to his father. The police advised Harden and his father of Harden’s rights, and the father and Harden waived Harden’s rights in writing. Harden then gave a videotaped confession to robbing and raping the victim and beating her to death. The state (plaintiff) charged Harden with murder, robbery, rape, and confinement. Harden moved to suppress his confession, and the trial court denied the motion. At trial, Harden testified to every detail that he gave in his videotaped confession. Harden was convicted of all the charges and sentenced to 120 consecutive years of prison and an additional 10 years to be served concurrently. Harden appealed, arguing that the trial court should have granted his motion to suppress because his consultation with his father was not a meaningful one, as required by state law.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Givan, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 830,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.