Reeves v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1DissentJohn A. Fogleman, Justice
Except for the matters set out in this separate opinion, I concur in the majority opinion. I do not agree that any statements made by appellant after his return to the premises until the Miranda warnings were given were inadmissible.
We must remember that the trial court found them admissible on motion to suppress. While we make an independent determination of voluntariness based upon the totality of the circumstances, we will not reverse the trial judge on his finding unless it was clearly against the preponderance of the evidence. Degler v. State, 257 Ark. 388, 517 S.W. 2d 515. It must be…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Orozco v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Degler v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1975
- Johnson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1972
- State Medical Board v. RodgersSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1935
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.