Legal Question in Criminal Law in Michigan

The question is whether you knowingly and intelligently waived your constitutional right against self-incrimination. The mere fact that you had received a drug some time before that is not in and of itself a determinative fact. The court has to consider "the totality of the circumstances" in deciding whether you knowingly and intelligently waived your rights. There are many factors for the court to consider, including your age and education, your past police contact [presumably the court would find that the waiver was ok if you had lots of prior arrests and interviews, but if you were a novice arrestee then more care needed to be given], length of detention before the interview, whether you were promised/threatened to get you to talk, whether you were deprived of food/water/sleep to get you to talk ... and ... whether you were injured/drugged/ill when you gave the statement. I had a case where a judge found the interview was ok even though it occurred about 8 hours after the defendant got out of an operation, in large part because the interview was recorded and the defendant sounded lucid, answered questions on-point, remembered many minute details from before the crash, challenged the cops when he disagreed with them, etc. HE was talking, not the drugs. Those "totality of the circumstances" allowed the judge in that case to reject the defendant's motion to suppress.