Legal Opinion

People v. in the Interest of J.D.

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided November 29, 1999No. 99SA112PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Scott

As a general rule, statements of a juvenile made in the course of a custodial interrogation are not admissible against the juvenile unless a parent is present during the interrogation and both the juvenile and parent are first advised of the juvenile’s Miranda rights.1 See § 19-2-511(1), 6 C.R.S. (1999); In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1, 41, 87 S.Ct. 1428, 18 L.Ed.2d 527 (1967); Nicholas v. People, 973 P.2d 1213, 1222 (Colo.1999). In this case, the Morgan County District Court (trial court) ruled that the statements of a juvenile, J.D., made in the course of telephone conversations she initiated -with…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. In Re GAULTSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Oregon v. MathiasonSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  4. California v. BehelerSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  5. Enrique Ortiz Cervantes v. Bill Walker, Superintendent, Banning Road CampCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1979

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. People v. MathenySupreme Court of Colorado · 2002
  2. Town of Erie v. EasonSupreme Court of Colorado · 2001
  3. Andersen v. LindenbaumSupreme Court of Colorado · 2007
  4. People v. MarkoColorado Court of Appeals · 2015
  5. People v. N.A.S.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2014

13 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