Legal Opinion
People v. Elliott
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided June 25, 2013No. Docket 144983PublishedCited by 56 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMarkman, J.
We granted leave to appeal to consider whether the trial court erred by admitting defendant’s confession to a parole officer. The Court of Appeals held that the admission of defendant’s confession violated Miranda v Arizona, 384 US 436; 86 S Ct 1602; 16 L Ed 2d 694 (1966), and Edwards v Arizona, 451 US 477; 101 S Ct 1880; 68 L Ed 2d 378 (1981), because Evans was a “law enforcement officer” for purposes of Miranda. We respectfully disagree because this is not a sufficient condition for the application of these decisions. Even if every parole officer constitutes a “law enforcement officer,”…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Edwards v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Berkemer v. McCartySupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Yarborough v. AlvaradoSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Stansbury v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by56 opinions
- People v. LewisMichigan Court of Appeals · 2013
- People of Michigan v. John Edward BarrittMichigan Court of Appeals · 2018
- State v. John PowersSupreme Court of Vermont · 2016
- People of Michigan v. Laricca Seminta MathewsMichigan Court of Appeals · 2018
- State v. BrandonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2022
51 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.