Lawyer of Luigi Mangione says murder suspect's rights were violated in McDonald's arrest
Evidence police turned up when arresting Luigi Mangione, the lead suspect in the slaying of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, should not be allowed in court, according to his lawyer.
Police making the arrest at a McDonald's restaurant in Altoona, Pennsylvania, failed to follow basic protocol, according to Blair County court filings released Friday. Officers questioned and searched Mangione without reading him Miranda rights afforded by the Constitution, making any statements or evidence they uncovered then inadmissible in court, Mangione's lawyer argues.
The motion to suppress evidence in Pennsylvania is the latest turn in the case that's captured global attention as the celebrity suspect has racked up charges in two states and on the federal level. The court documents also reveal new details about how police made the arrest.
Mangione's capture came at the end of a days-long manhunt for a suspect in the execution-style killing. Police celebrated the ignominious end to the search and touted evidence they found on him. Mangione had a gun in his backpack that investigators linked to shell casings at the scene of the Thompson's murder in Manhattan.
'Any reasonable person in [Mangione's] position would have thought he/she was being restrained, detained and otherwise not free to leave,' writes Thomas M. Dickey, Mangione's lawyer in Pennsylvania. "The curtailment of [Mangione's] liberty and the detaining of the Defendant at this time" violated the Fourth and Fourteenth amendments.
State prosecutors in Pennsylvania could not be immediately reached for comment. Dickey did not respond to repeated requests for comment.
The development in the case in Pennsylvania comes a week after Mangione's Manhattan attorney argued in New York state court that he had been unlawfully searched during his arrest and that she would try to have any evidence uncovered and excluded from court.
The filing out of Pennsylvania offers new details on how Altoona police approached and ultimately detained the lead suspect in the CEO slaying.
On December 9, at around 9:30 a.m., two officers arrived at the McDonald's where Mangione had been for about 30 minutes, according to the court filings.
The officers entered and blocked Mangione from leaving as he sat at a corner table by 'forming a human law enforcement wall' around him, Dickey writes. The aggressive posture of the officers effectively detained Mangione, he says. Then officers told Mangione to provide identification and ordered him to put his hands on his head.
'At no time did the two (2) officers indicate that [Mangione] was free to go,' Dickey argues. 'Nor did they explain the reasons as to why Defendant was being detained; other than that, he looked suspicious and/or overstayed his welcome as a customer at McDonald's.'
More police soon arrived. As many as 10 officers blocked him from leaving.
The effective detainment and further questioning came without officers reading Miranda rights to Mangione, which include his right to remain silent and the right to an attorney.
At one point Mangione "shook his head" to say he didn't want to talk to police and an officer said he wasn't in custody, according to Dickey. "This was materially false, inaccurate and contrary to law," the lawyer contends.
Police only informed Mangione he was under investigation about 15 minutes into his detainment, Dickey says, and only read him Miranda rights after almost 20 minutes of questioning.
Officers also searched his bag. Among the items police found in Mangione's backpack were a handgun, a suspected 3D-printed silencer, a red notebook police have called a manifesto, nearly $8,000, almost $2,000 in foreign currency, a Polaroid camera and a Greyhound bus ticket from Philadelphia to Pittsburgh.
Mangione faces a range of changes across different courthouses.
Pennsylvania prosecutors have charged him with forgery, carrying an unlicensed firearm and presenting a false ID to law enforcement, among other charges.
New York state prosecutors delivered an 11-count indictment against Mangione charing him with first-degree murder and murder as an act of terrorism among other crimes.
Federal prosecutors have charged him with murder, use of a firearm silencer in committing a violent crime and interstate stalking. The federal charges carry an added weight: prosecutors could argue Mangione deserves the death penalty if he's found guilty.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Police arrested Luigi Mangione improperly at McDonald's, lawyer says
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
39 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Here's where to see fireworks in Mass. this weekend
Massachusetts residents looking to catch a fireworks show should travel to Abington, Dalton, Foxborough or Winchester this weekend. All four towns will have events that feature fireworks displays on June 7, according to the state's department of fire services's website. See below for where you can find fireworks displays for this weekend: Abington: A fireworks display celebrating Founders Day will take place at Memorial Field at 9 p.m. on Saturday. Dalton: The Dalton Fair at American Legion Park at 255 North St. will have a fireworks show at 10 p.m. on Saturday Foxborough: A fireworks display for Founders Day will take place at Booth Fields at 79 South St. from 9:05 p.m. to 10 p.m. on June 7. Winchester: A fireworks show for Winchester Town Day will be happening at Manchester Field at 458 Main St. this Saturday at 9:15 p.m. Fireworks are illegal in Massachusetts for those without a certification or licensing. The fire service department's website urges residents to 'leave fireworks to the professionals.' 'Between 2019 and 2023, Massachusetts medical facilities treated more than 200 people for burns and other injuries associated with fireworks,' the website reads. 'Two dozen people were treated for severe burn injuries that covered 5% or more of the victim's body.' Former Boston Celtics coach does not want Knicks job: 'Absolutely not' Trump opens up about 'the biggest scandal' in many years in foreign visit McDonald's launches new McFlurry flavor inspired by summertime I-93 south in Woburn closed due to 'police activity', MassDOT says Man officials say killed someone in drunk head-on crash on Mass. bridge is arraigned Read the original article on MassLive.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Why are ICE agents running amok? Because they can.
As the Trump administration pushes for more mass deportations, law enforcement officers from the Department of Homeland Security are suddenly everywhere. In San Diego, Homeland Security officers conducted a SWAT-style raid on a restaurant, handcuffing 19 employees over an hour and slamming the manager against a wall in the process. Eventually, they arrested four people. The raid was so heavy-handed that the officers had to deploy flashbang grenades to escape from the angry crowd that gathered in response. Even members of Congress aren't safe. Last week, Homeland Security officers forced their way into Rep. Jerry Nadler's (D) New York office without a warrant. When one of the staffers protested, she was handcuffed and detained. The cases you hear about are only the tip of the iceberg. Federal officers are fanning out across the country, conducting raids, traffic stops, even scooping people up at courthouses when they appear for immigration hearings and carting them away in leg irons and shackles — harsh treatment that you seldom see even when felons are arrested. This heavy-handedness and cruelty isn't a glitch — it's intentional, as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Kristi Noem and Tom Homan, President Trump's border czar, attempt to frighten immigrants into leaving the country. Even legal residents and American citizens are getting caught up in the crackdown. And the worst part is, while things like barging into a congressman's office and detaining his staffers aren't legal, there is nothing anyone can do about it. If Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents force their way into your house without a warrant, slap you around and detain your family at gunpoint while conducting an illegal search, you have no way of getting your constitutional claims into federal court. As a practical matter, these agents are above the law and cannot be held accountable for violating your constitutional rights. Why this is true is yet another example of our system of checks and balances failing to appreciate the risk of a president deciding to simply the the law. After the Civil War, to ensure that states abided by the Constitution, Congress passed 42 U.S. Code 1983, giving individuals the right to sue in federal court when their constitutional rights had been violated under color of state law. At the time, it was inconceivable that there should be a similar need to sue for constitutional violations by the federal government. For one thing, law enforcement was almost exclusively under state control — the FBI was not founded until 1908. Moreover, the federal government was seen, generally, as the perennial good guy and the guarantor of constitutional rights, a position it held right through the civil rights era. As the federal government and federal law enforcement grew, this became more and more untenable. So in 1971, in a case called Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, the Supreme Court created what is known as a 'Bivens action' as an analogue of section 1983, giving individuals the right to sue in court when their Fourth Amendment rights were violated under color of federal law. Since then, the Supreme Court has been reluctant to extend the reach of Bivens, ultimately holding in 2022 that no one could ever bring a legal claim for excessive force — or any constitutional claim — against a federal officer enforcing immigration laws. This is dangerous, especially now. The rule of law is not supposed to run on the honor system. Section 1983 and Bivens actions are not just about monetary damages. They are a way for citizens to hold their government accountable. Officers' understanding that they may someday have to explain their actions is a powerful deterrent to bad behavior. Nobody likes accountability, but it makes all of us, including police officers, better people. The current system of 'what happens in ICE, stays in ICE' is the opposite of that. Unchecked by the courts, ICE's behavior will only get worse over the next three and a half years. Even the most well-meaning bureaucracies are subject to mission creep, so you can expect Noem's troops to expand their activities well beyond detaining immigrants. The Homeland Security officers who invaded Nadler's office were hunting for protesters, and Homan has already threatened state officials and even members of Congress with arrest for 'interfering' with ICE. When it comes to constitutional rights, no man is an island. The threats, performative cruelty and denials of basic due process are not attacks on immigrants. They are attacks on the rule of law itself. You should be just as upset and concerned by the Guatemalan snatched off the street and hustled onto a plane with no notice and no due process as you are by the sobbing staffer handcuffed in Nadler's office. In the eyes of our Constitution, they are all of us. Chris Truax is a charter member of the Society for the Rule of Law and an appellate attorney. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
4 hours ago
- The Hill
Why are ICE agents running amok? Because they can.
As the Trump administration pushes for more mass deportations, law enforcement officers from the Department of Homeland Security are suddenly everywhere. In San Diego, Homeland Security officers conducted a SWAT-style raid on a restaurant, handcuffing 19 employees over an hour and slamming the manager against a wall in the process. Eventually, they arrested four people. The raid was so heavy-handed that the officers had to deploy flashbang grenades to escape from the angry crowd that gathered in response. Even members of Congress aren't safe. Last week, Homeland Security officers forced their way into Rep. Jerry Nadler's (D) New York office without a warrant. When one of the staffers protested, she was handcuffed and detained. The cases you hear about are only the tip of the iceberg. Federal officers are fanning out across the country, conducting raids, traffic stops, even scooping people up at courthouses when they appear for immigration hearings and carting them away in leg irons and shackles — harsh treatment that you seldom see even when felons are arrested. This heavy-handedness and cruelty isn't a glitch — it's intentional, as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Kristi Noem and Tom Homan, President Trump's border czar, attempt to frighten immigrants into leaving the country. Even legal residents and American citizens are getting caught up in the crackdown. And the worst part is, while things like barging into a congressman's office and detaining his staffers aren't legal, there is nothing anyone can do about it. If Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents force their way into your house without a warrant, slap you around and detain your family at gunpoint while conducting an illegal search, you have no way of getting your constitutional claims into federal court. As a practical matter, these agents are above the law and cannot be held accountable for violating your constitutional rights. Why this is true is yet another example of our system of checks and balances failing to appreciate the risk of a president deciding to simply the the law. After the Civil War, to ensure that states abided by the Constitution, Congress passed 42 U.S. Code 1983, giving individuals the right to sue in federal court when their constitutional rights had been violated under color of state law. At the time, it was inconceivable that there should be a similar need to sue for constitutional violations by the federal government. For one thing, law enforcement was almost exclusively under state control — the FBI was not founded until 1908. Moreover, the federal government was seen, generally, as the perennial good guy and the guarantor of constitutional rights, a position it held right through the civil rights era. As the federal government and federal law enforcement grew, this became more and more untenable. So in 1971, in a case called Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, the Supreme Court created what is known as a 'Bivens action' as an analogue of section 1983, giving individuals the right to sue in court when their Fourth Amendment rights were violated under color of federal law. Since then, the Supreme Court has been reluctant to extend the reach of Bivens, ultimately holding in 2022 that no one could ever bring a legal claim for excessive force — or any constitutional claim — against a federal officer enforcing immigration laws. This is dangerous, especially now. The rule of law is not supposed to run on the honor system. Section 1983 and Bivens actions are not just about monetary damages. They are a way for citizens to hold their government accountable. Officers' understanding that they may someday have to explain their actions is a powerful deterrent to bad behavior. Nobody likes accountability, but it makes all of us, including police officers, better people. The current system of 'what happens in ICE, stays in ICE' is the opposite of that. Unchecked by the courts, ICE's behavior will only get worse over the next three and a half years. Even the most well-meaning bureaucracies are subject to mission creep, so you can expect Noem's troops to expand their activities well beyond detaining immigrants. The Homeland Security officers who invaded Nadler's office were hunting for protesters, and Homan has already threatened state officials and even members of Congress with arrest for 'interfering' with ICE. When it comes to constitutional rights, no man is an island. The threats, performative cruelty and denials of basic due process are not attacks on immigrants. They are attacks on the rule of law itself. You should be just as upset and concerned by the Guatemalan snatched off the street and hustled onto a plane with no notice and no due process as you are by the sobbing staffer handcuffed in Nadler's office. In the eyes of our Constitution, they are all of us. Chris Truax is a charter member of the Society for the Rule of Law and an appellate attorney.
