Legal Opinion
State v. Gobert
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Decided January 28, 2009No. PD-0202-08PublishedCited by 106 opinions
1Opinion of the Court 1
OPINION
2Opinion of the Court · PricePrice, J.
in which MEYERS, WOMACK, JOHNSON, KEASLER, HERVEY, HOLCOMB and COCHRAN, JJ., joined.
During a custodial interrogation, right after his Miranda rights were read to him, 1 the appellee made a statement that referenced his right to a “lawyer.” The police detectives continued the interrogation without providing counsel. We granted the appellee’s petition for discretionary review in order to determine whether the continued interrogation, resulting in a confession, violated the appellee’s Fifth Amendment right to the presence of counsel during custodial interrogation. We hold that it did.
FACTS…
3Cases cited14 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Edwards v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Carmouche v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2000
- Davis v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- McNeil v. WisconsinSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by106 opinions
- Davis v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2010
- State of Texas v. Duran, AnthonyCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2013
- Carter v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2010
- McClintock, Bradley RayCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2014
- MBUGUA v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2010
101 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.