Logourl black
From our private database of 13,800+ case briefs...

Maryland v. Shatzer

United States Supreme Court
130 S. Ct. 1213 (2010)


Facts

In 2003, a social worker reported allegations that Michael Shatzer (defendant) had abused his three-year-old son. At the time of this allegation, Shatzer was imprisoned for a different child-sexual-abuse conviction. The 2003 allegation was assigned to Detective Shane Blankenship, who went to interview Shatzer in prison. Shatzer initially waived his Miranda rights but afterwards demanded an attorney, at which point Blankenship ended the interview. The investigation was closed shortly afterwards. Two and a half years later, further details of the 2003 allegations against Shatzer were reported. Detective Paul Hoover undertook the investigation and on March 2, 2006 went to interview Shatzer in prison. Hoover obtained a written Miranda waiver and interviewed Shatzer. Shatzer agreed to take a polygraph five days later. Shatzer was again read his Miranda rights. Shatzer signed another written waiver and proceeded to fail the polygraph test. After further questioning, Shatzer confessed. Shatzer then requested an attorney, and Hoover ended the interrogation.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Holding and Reasoning (Scalia, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Concurrence (Stevens, J.)

The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the concurring judge or justice’s opinion. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 166,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 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.