Legal Opinion

State v. Murphy

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 6, 2001No. 98-1586Published

1Concurrence · CookCook, J.

Though I would affirm Murphy’s convictions and death sentence, I respectfully disagree with the majority’s analysis of Murphy’s first and tenth propositions of law.

I. Miranda

A. Invocation of the Right to Cut Off Questioning

I agree with the majority’s conclusion in Part 1(A) that Murphy initially waived his right to remain silent during his custodial interrogation by Detective Yiduya. But after Murphy made some exculpatory statements, he said to Detective Viduya, “I’m ready to quit talking now and I’m ready to go home, too.” The majority decides that when examined “in context” this statement…

Also in this document: Concurrence · Moyer.

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  3. United States v. OlanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  4. Edwards v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  5. Arizona v. FulminanteSupreme Court of the United States · 1991

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API