Legal Opinion
State v. Barker
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided February 22, 1978No. 77-296PublishedCited by 111 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLocher, J.
I
Appellant, in his first four propositions of law, contends that his confession and the fruits obtained therefrom were improperly admitted in evidence. This contention is premised upon several asserted reasons. First, appellant alleges that the police failed to properly advise him of his constitutional rights, pursuant to the mandate of Miranda v. Arizona (1966), 384 U. S. 436, by not explaining the exact meaning of his rights. Secondly, appellant claims he was illegally arrested without probable cause at 10:30 a. m. on January 3, 1975. Thirdly, the entirety of the circumstances reveals the…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Simmons v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Haynes v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by111 opinions
- State v. MaurerOhio Supreme Court · 1984
- State v. PhillipsOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- State v. LongOhio Court of Appeals · 1998
- State v. SkatzesOhio Supreme Court · 2004
- State v. GreenOhio Supreme Court · 2000
106 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.