Legal Opinion

State v. Inman

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided April 29, 1986No. 1 CA-CR 8765PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KLEINSCHMIDT, Judge.

Catherine Inman was convicted of three counts of child abuse. On appeal she claims that certain incriminating statements she made to the police were improperly admitted in evidence because the police did not honor her request for an attorney. We affirm because we believe that the appellant, after inquiring when an attorney would be appointed for her, waived her right to counsel by initiating further discussion with the police.

Shortly after the appellant and her five-year-old son began living with one Alan Thompson the boy suffered a series of injuries culminating in severe…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  3. Edwards v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  4. Oregon v. BradshawSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  5. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. Pierre Fouche, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. GayCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
  2. State v. SmithArizona Supreme Court · 1989
  3. State v. StaatzArizona Supreme Court · 1988
  4. State v. FlowerArizona Supreme Court · 1989
  5. State of Arizona v. Anthony Shariff GayCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007

2 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