Legal Opinion

State v. Wint

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided December 12, 2018No. A-28/29 September Term 2017; 079660PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Albin

*966**180In Edwards v. Arizona, the United States Supreme Court held that when an accused invokes his right to have counsel present during a custodial interrogation, questioning must cease unless the accused initiates further communication or conversation. 451 U.S. 477, 484-85, 101 S.Ct. 1880, 68 L.Ed.2d 378 (1981). The Edwards doctrine, which bars continuing an interrogation after a request for counsel, applies even if a different law enforcement agency seeks to question the accused about an unrelated crime, Arizona v. Roberson, 486 U.S. 675, 686-88, 108 S.Ct. 2093, 100 L.Ed.2d 704 (1988), and…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Edwards v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  4. Brown v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  5. Malloy v. HoganSupreme Court of the United States · 1964

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. DARREN E. RICHARDSON (17-10-0966, PASSAIC COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2020
  2. STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. KENNETH D. HARDEN (17-04-0387 AND 17-03-0190, CUMBERLAND COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2021
  3. State v. Abayuba Rivas (086051) (Union County & Statewide)Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2022
  4. State v. Kareem T. Tillery (079832) (Essex County and Statewide)Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2019
  5. State v. Kareem T. Tillery (079832) (Essex County and Statewide)Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2019

1 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