Legal Opinion

State v. Moulds

Idaho Court of Appeals

Decided December 6, 1983No. 14708PublishedCited by 49 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BURNETT, Judge.

Michael Moulds stands accused of theft, burglary and robbery. The district court has entered a suppression order, barring the prosecutor from using as evidence at trial certain statements made by Moulds to police officers during a custodial interrogation. The court held that the statements had been obtained in violation- of Moulds’ constitutional right to have counsel present during the interrogation. The State of Idaho has appealed, contending that police interrogators are not required to honor a request for counsel unless the request is made unequivocally. The State also…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  3. United States v. United States Gypsum Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
  4. Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  5. Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963

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

3Cited by49 opinions

  1. Smith v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. State v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
  3. Commonwealth v. HubbleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  4. Carter v. StateIdaho Supreme Court · 1985
  5. Ruffin v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987

44 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