Legal Opinion
Nelson Hernandez v. Kim Holland
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided April 24, 2014No. 11-55337PublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BEA, Circuit Judge:
We must decide whether, in the context of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA), 110 Stat. 1214, a mid-trial conversation between a court bailiff and a criminal defendant constituted an interrogation that must be preceded by a Miranda warning. We decide that the state court’s determination that the conversation was not such an inquiry was reasonable.
Petitioner Nelson Hernandez seeks habeas relief from his state murder conviction on the ground that his right against self-incrimination under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602,…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Harrington v. RichterSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Wiggins v. Smith, WardenSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Picard v. ConnorSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Rhode Island v. InnisSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- Frank Loher v. Todd ThomasCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
- Rodney Garrott v. Pat GlebeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015
- Kevin Jones, Jr. v. K. HarringtonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
- Ezzard Ellis v. C. HarrisonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2020
- Frank Loher v. Todd ThomasCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.