State v. Rollwage
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtFoley, J.
Defendant, 18, was arrested and given the appropriate Miranda advice, after which he made oral and written confessions to police officers. The confessions were suppressed as not voluntary by the trial court on motion of the defendant. The trial court found that “[t]here was no violation of defendant’s Miranda rights.” The court found that the only statements by way of inducement the officers had made were the following:
“* * * I had stated that it sometimes is a lot easier to alleviate yourself of the pressures that you are under if you go ahead and tell what is happening. If you confess, you…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Culombe v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- State v. NunnOregon Supreme Court · 1958
- State v. ShipleyOregon Supreme Court · 1962
- State v. KeiperCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1972
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State v. RodriguezCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1978
- State v. LyonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1983
- State v. MartinCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
- State v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1983
- State v. RodriguezCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1978