Legal Opinion

United States v. Casey Hunter

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Decided February 28, 2013No. 12-1751PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

TINDER, Circuit Judge.

The United States brings this interlocutory appeal from a district court order suppressing statements made by the defendant, Casey Darrel Hunter, to two law enforcement officers who were interrogating him. The district court granted Hunter’s motion to suppress because it found that Hunter had unambiguously invoked his right to counsel before the interrogation with these officers had begun. We agree with the district court that Hunter had unambiguously and unequivocally invoked his right to counsel, and therefore, all questioning by law enforcement officers should have…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Edwards v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  3. Rhode Island v. InnisSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  4. Davis v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  5. Smith v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1984

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Nelson Hernandez v. Kim HollandCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
  2. Cruz, Adelfo RamirezCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2015
  3. Sessoms v. GroundsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
  4. United States v. FamilettiCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2017
  5. Saeger v. AvilaDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2013

22 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