Renner v. State
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtHeffernan, J.
The principal contention of the state public defender on this appeal is that the statement's of both Carol and Lloyd were involuntary. It is his contention that under the ruling of Jackson v. Denno (1964), 378 U. S. 368, 84 Sup. Ct. 1774, 12 L. Ed. 2d 908, A. L. R. 2d 1205, and State ex rel. Goodchild v. Burke (1965), 27 Wis. 2d 244, 133 N. W. 2d 753, it was the duty of the court to make a preliminary determination of the voluntariness of the statements. 1 Whether these statements are voluntary is governed by the “totality of the circumstances” test which we discussed in detail in Bradley v.…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Bruton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Stovall v. DennoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Jackson v. DennoSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Wright v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
- State v. KnoblockWisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
- State v. CartagenaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
- State v. SorensonCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1989
- Upchurch v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.