IN RE S.W.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
BLACKBURNE-RIGSBY, Associate Judge:
This case presents a “rare” instance in which we conclude that “a self-incriminating statement was ‘compelled’ despite the fact that the law enforcement authorities adhered to the dictates of Miranda [v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 467, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966).]” Dickerson v. United States, 530 U.S. 428, 444, 120 S.Ct. 2326, 147 L.Ed.2d 405 (2000). Specifically, we conclude that a juvenile’s confession during custodial interrogation was involuntary, in spite of an effectively delivered Miranda warning and a knowing and intelligent waiver of Miranda…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- In Re GAULTSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Oregon v. ElstadSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Michigan v. MosleySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Commonwealth v. QuinonesMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2019
- DAVID T. ROBINSON v. UNITED STATES.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2016
- Lejeezan Toudle v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2018