Legal Opinion
State v. Holt
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided September 12, 1997No. C-960140PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Painter, Presiding Judge.
We are asked to determine whether a person in custody for a separate offense may be questioned about other criminal conduct, which the police believe he has witnessed, without the necessity of Miranda advice. We hold that Miranda applies to any person in custody, and it matters not that the police believe that the person in custody is a witness or a suspect. See Miranda v. Arizona (1966), 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694.
I. Facts
On May 6, 1995, Phillip Haley, fourteen years of age, was shot and killed. At this time, the defendant-appellant, Rayshun Holt, a…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Rhode Island v. InnisSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Berkemer v. McCartySupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Moran v. BurbineSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State v. PorterOhio Court of Appeals · 2008
- State v. EvansOhio Court of Appeals · 2001
- Lindsey v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2006
- State v. GrantOhio Court of Appeals · 2023
- State v. GibsonOhio Court of Appeals · 2017