Fouche v. United States

rejecting petitioner's argument that, under Skipper and Ramos, he should be entitled to present evidence on parole eligibility | rejecting petitioner’s argument that, under Skipper and Ramos, he should be entitled to present evidence on parole eligibility | defendant observed in the vicinity of a recent bank robbery suddenly accelerated his vehicle and ran a stop sign | limited questioning permitted to clarify whether ambiguous conduct was intended to invoke right to silence | defendant made equivocal request when he first asked to be allowed to call an attorney, but then instead called his wife for advice and later asked the officer, “What should I do?” | statement held admissible even though obtained after accused asked investigator about retaining a lawyer and the investigator responded that he was not a lawyer and would not give advice