State v. Byrd
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
CLARK, Judge.
The first issue raised by this appeal is whether the trial court erred in admitting on rebuttal for the purpose of impeachment inculpatory statements made by defendant to the investigating officer during custodial interrogation but denied by defendant at trial.
For the first time since Miranda [Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed. 2d 694 (1966)] laid down definitive rules to prevent police abuse in custodial interrogations, the United States Supreme Court, in Harris v. New York, 401 U.S. 222, 91 S.Ct. 643, 28 L.Ed. 2d 1 (1971), contracted rather than expanded…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Harris v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Lego v. TwomeySupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Oregon v. HassSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Milton v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. StricklandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- State v. BookerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
- State v. RichardsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
- State v. WashingtonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
- State v. WashingtonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.