State v. Trochez-Jimenez
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtStephens, J.
¶1 Petitioner Cesar Trochez-Jimenez appeals his conviction for murder in the second degree, arguing the statements he made during custodial interrogation should have been suppressed because they were taken in violation of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S. Ct. 1602, 16 L. Ed. 2d 694 (1966); Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477, 101 S. Ct. 1880, 68 L. Ed. 2d 378 (1981); and Arizona v. Roberson, 486 U.S. 675, 108 S. Ct. 2093, 100 L. Ed. 2d 704 (1988). Together these cases hold that prior to custodial interrogation, a suspect must be informed of his right to remain silent and right to counsel…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Edwards v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Malloy v. HoganSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- McNeil v. WisconsinSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Arizona v. RobersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.