Legal Opinion

State v. Peterson

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided April 6, 2007No. 05-349PublishedCited by 1 opinion

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

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. United States v. LeonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  4. Harris v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  5. Oregon v. ElstadSupreme Court of the United States · 1985

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State v. PetersonSupreme Court of Vermont · 2007

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API