State v. Peterson
Supreme Court of Vermont
1Opinion of the CourtDooley, J.
¶ 1. The issue in this case is the scope of the exclusionary rule in criminal cases, specifically, whether physical evidence obtained as a result of a violation of defendant’s Miranda rights must be excluded at trial. We conclude that under the Vermont Constitution, *437Chapter I, Article 10, and the Vermont exclusionary rule, physical evidence obtained in violation of Miranda rights must be suppressed. We reverse in part and remand.
¶ 2. Defendant James Peterson appeals the denial of two suppression motions. Both involve a core set of undisputed facts. Defendant was looking for his girlfriend and…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- United States v. LeonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Harris v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Oregon v. ElstadSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- State v. PetersonSupreme Court of Vermont · 2007