State v. Inman
Court of Appeals of Arizona
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
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Edwards v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Oregon v. BradshawSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- 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
- State v. GayCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
- State v. SmithArizona Supreme Court · 1989
- State v. StaatzArizona Supreme Court · 1988
- State v. FlowerArizona Supreme Court · 1989
- State of Arizona v. Anthony Shariff GayCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.