State v. Bishop
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtBeanch, J.
The principal contention of defendants is that the court erred in admitting into evidence the confessions of defendants.
The test of admissibility is whether the statements made by defendants were in fact voluntarily and understandingly made. State v. Gray, 268 N.C. 69, 150 S.E. 2d 1; State v. Rogers, 233 N.C. 390, 64 S.E. 2d 572; State v. Roberts, 12 N.C. 259. Although the fact that the defendant was in custody is a circumstance to be considered when considering the voluntariness of a confession, State v. Guffey, 261 N.C. 322, 134 S.E. 2d 619, this fact does not of itself render it…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- State v. GraySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
- State v. RogersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
- State v. HamiltonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
- State v. BellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by75 opinions
- Michigan v. MosleySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- State v. CovingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
- State v. RookSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
- State v. LynchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
- State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
70 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.