Legal Opinion

People v. Carroll

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided January 4, 2001No. 3-00-0066PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PRESIDING JUSTICE HOMER

delivered the opinion of the court:

The sole issue presented by this appeal is whether defendant, Harold Carroll, was in custody, and therefore entitled to Miranda warnings, at the time he gave a taped confession. The State appeals from the trial court’s order granting defendant’s motion to suppress the confession. For the reasons that follow, we affirm. In so doing, we hold: (1) the proper test for determining whether an accused is in custody for purposes of Miranda is objective, i.e., whether a reasonable person in the accused’s position would consider himself to be in…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Stansbury v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  2. People v. MelockIllinois Supreme Court · 1992
  3. People v. LucasIllinois Supreme Court · 1989
  4. People v. KiddIllinois Supreme Court · 1996
  5. People v. BrownIllinois Supreme Court · 1990

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. State v. Godwin, Sr.Idaho Supreme Court · 2019
  2. People v. FRANK-McCARRONAppellate Court of Illinois · 2010
  3. People v. AlfaroAppellate Court of Illinois · 2008
  4. People v. ColemanAppellate Court of Illinois · 2015
  5. Mario M. Mills v. The State of WyomingWyoming Supreme Court · 2022

7 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