Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

United States v. Abdulmutallab

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
2011 WL 4345243 (2011)


Facts

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab (defendant), a Nigerian citizen, was indicted in federal district court after he attempted to ignite explosives concealed in his underwear while flying as a passenger from Amsterdam to Detroit, Michigan. During his planned attack, Abdulmutallab successfully lit his pants and the side of the aircraft on fire. Nearby passengers subdued Abdulmutallab while the flames were extinguished. During the incident, Abdulmutallab suffered significant burns and was taken by U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers to the University of Michigan Hospital for medical treatment. Later, Abdulmutallab was questioned at the hospital by Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents. During the 50-minute questioning, Abdulmutallab admitted to possessing and attempting to use the explosives to blow up the plane on behalf of al-Qaeda. However, the federal agents did not advise Abdulmutallab of his Miranda rights, fearing that there was little time to prevent possible additional, imminent aircraft attacks. Prior to trial, Abdulmutallab filed a motion to suppress his statements made prior to the issuance of his Miranda warnings. The federal government argued that Abdulmutallab’s pre-Miranda statements were admissible under the public-safety exception to Miranda rights, which was articulated in New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. 649 (1984).

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Edmunds, 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, please start your free trial or log in.

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 176,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.