State v. Edrozo
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GARDEBRING, Justice.
This pretrial appeal requires us to determine whether incriminating statements, which were made by a suspect to a companion while both were seated in the rear seat of a marked police car and which were secretly tape recorded, are admissible in a criminal trial for second-degree assault with a dangerous weapon. In addition,, we are asked to determine whether unrecorded voluntary statements made by the suspect away from-a place of detention are admissible. Because we hold that the lower court decisions suppressing the statements were clearly erroneous, we reverse.
On…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Rhode Island v. InnisSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Berkemer v. McCartySupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Oregon v. ElstadSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Hoffa v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- State v. FleckSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2012
- State v. VangSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2014
- State v. ScottSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1998
- State v. VanceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
- State of Minnesota v. Jose Martin Lugo, Jr.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2016
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.