Legal Opinion

People v. Matheny

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided May 20, 2002No. 01SA355PublishedCited by 132 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Rice

In this interlocutory appeal filed pursuant to C.A.R. 4.1, the prosecution challenges an order of the Park County District Court suppressing all statements made by Defendant, Jonathan Matheny, to investigators during a videotaped interview with police at the headquarters of the Colorado Springs Police Department. The trial court ruled that these statements must be suppressed because they were obtained in violation of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). For the reasons set forth below, we hold that Defendant was not in custody within the meaning of Miranda…

2Cases cited76 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Ornelas v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  3. Rhode Island v. InnisSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  4. Berkemer v. McCartySupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  5. Oregon v. MathiasonSupreme Court of the United States · 1977

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

3Cited by132 opinions

  1. Lopez v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 2005
  2. State v. RogersNebraska Supreme Court · 2009
  3. People v. MinjarezSupreme Court of Colorado · 2003
  4. Effland v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 2010
  5. People v. HarlanSupreme Court of Colorado · 2005

127 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