Whether the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit may condition enforcement of a citizen's right against unlawful detention guaranteed by U.S. Const. amend. IV and U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1, upon waiver of the right against self-incrimination guaranteed by U.S. Const. amend. V

QUESTION PRESENTED No other U.S. Courts of Appeals require protestations of innocence as a precondition to enforcement of one’s right against unlawful detention. The Sixth Circuit stands alone and apart from its sister circuits. The mandatory or required or forced waiver of one Constitutional right to remain silent in order to preserve another Constitutional right against unlawful detention is a question of exceptional importance because it violates rights clearly established by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), United States v. Hale, 422 U.S. 171 (1975), and a seminal decision of the Sixth Circuit itself extending Hale, Minor v. Black, 527 F.2d 1 (6th Cir. 1975). The question presented is as follows: Whether the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit may condition enforcement of a citizen’s right against unlawful detention guaranteed by U.S. Const. amend. IV and U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1, upon waiver of the right against self-incrimination guaranteed by U.S. Const. amend. V.