Conrad, attorney want statements excluded
By Kat Russell, Reporter
The Paducah Sun
February 11, 2016
http://www.paducahsun.com/news/local/021116_PS_Conrad_Hearing
At a hearing Wednesday in McCracken Circuit Court, Jeffery Conrad, who is scheduled to stand trial on a murder charge next month, and his attorney Doug Moore argued to suppress statements Conrad made to McCracken County Sheriff's Capt. Matt Carter.
Conrad, 49, was charged after he shot and killed Garlon Casey Cox, 30, on June 8 at a Reidland storage unit. Officials said Conrad caught Cox and a friend stealing from his unit. Conrad has stated he fired his weapon to protect a female friend who had accompanied him to the storage facility.
The statements Conrad is seeking to exclude were made at the sheriff's department after the shooting.
In their motion, Moore argued Carter continued to question Conrad after Conrad had requested a lawyer. The motion implies Conrad "clearly and unequivocally asserted to Carter his right to counsel, which ... should have ended all questioning."
Conrad is quoted in the document as having said, "I do not wish to proceed without an attorney," during the interview.
Moore contended anything Conrad said during that interview following that assertion should be inadmissible at trial.
"The argument comes down to whether (Conrad's) statement was an unequivocal and unambiguous assertion of his right to counsel," Moore said. "My understanding of the rule ... is that the police must cease interrogating a suspect only if the suspect clearly and unambiguously asserts his or her right to counsel."
Carter testified at the hearing, stating after Conrad requested a lawyer, the questions stopped. Instead, Carter said he continued to speak with Conrad about getting a lawyer.
"My intent and purpose in speaking to him continually had nothing to do with the crime, had nothing to do with questioning him about the crime," he said. "I took it, from what Mr. Conrad told me, is that it's not that he didn't want to talk to me, but he wanted to speak with me with an attorney present. So I was merely trying to help facilitate (that)."
Carter said he was "trying to discern if (Conrad) had a specific attorney that he was wishing to call."
It was after that, Carter said, that Conrad made a statement implying he had shot Cox because Cox was backing his truck up in the direction of the female friend.
After Carter's testimony, Commonwealth Attorney Dan Boaz contended Conrad's testimony would only be inadmissible if Carter had continued to question Conrad after he had requested a lawyer.
"I don't think (Carter) continued to ask questions," Boaz said. "As a matter of fact, I think he was moving on to the next witness to interview and then Mr. Conrad voluntarily made the statement. That wasn't a response to a question. That was a voluntary statement by Mr. Conrad made of his own fruition."
McCracken Circuit Judge Tim Kaltenbach said he would review the transcript of Conrad's statements during the interview before, as well as review the relevant laws, and issue his ruling within 10 days.
Conrad's trial is scheduled to begin on March 16.
Contact Kat Russell, a Paducah Sun staff writer, at 270-575-8653.
Conrad, 49, was charged after he shot and killed Garlon Casey Cox, 30, on June 8 at a Reidland storage unit. Officials said Conrad caught Cox and a friend stealing from his unit. Conrad has stated he fired his weapon to protect a female friend who had accompanied him to the storage facility.
The statements Conrad is seeking to exclude were made at the sheriff's department after the shooting.
In their motion, Moore argued Carter continued to question Conrad after Conrad had requested a lawyer. The motion implies Conrad "clearly and unequivocally asserted to Carter his right to counsel, which ... should have ended all questioning."
Conrad is quoted in the document as having said, "I do not wish to proceed without an attorney," during the interview.
Moore contended anything Conrad said during that interview following that assertion should be inadmissible at trial.
"The argument comes down to whether (Conrad's) statement was an unequivocal and unambiguous assertion of his right to counsel," Moore said. "My understanding of the rule ... is that the police must cease interrogating a suspect only if the suspect clearly and unambiguously asserts his or her right to counsel."
Carter testified at the hearing, stating after Conrad requested a lawyer, the questions stopped. Instead, Carter said he continued to speak with Conrad about getting a lawyer.
"My intent and purpose in speaking to him continually had nothing to do with the crime, had nothing to do with questioning him about the crime," he said. "I took it, from what Mr. Conrad told me, is that it's not that he didn't want to talk to me, but he wanted to speak with me with an attorney present. So I was merely trying to help facilitate (that)."
Carter said he was "trying to discern if (Conrad) had a specific attorney that he was wishing to call."
It was after that, Carter said, that Conrad made a statement implying he had shot Cox because Cox was backing his truck up in the direction of the female friend.
After Carter's testimony, Commonwealth Attorney Dan Boaz contended Conrad's testimony would only be inadmissible if Carter had continued to question Conrad after he had requested a lawyer.
"I don't think (Carter) continued to ask questions," Boaz said. "As a matter of fact, I think he was moving on to the next witness to interview and then Mr. Conrad voluntarily made the statement. That wasn't a response to a question. That was a voluntary statement by Mr. Conrad made of his own fruition."
McCracken Circuit Judge Tim Kaltenbach said he would review the transcript of Conrad's statements during the interview before, as well as review the relevant laws, and issue his ruling within 10 days.
Conrad's trial is scheduled to begin on March 16.
Contact Kat Russell, a Paducah Sun staff writer, at 270-575-8653.
