State v. Evans
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Painter, Judge.
The trial court, after initially overruling a motion to suppress, reconsidered and, based on our decision in State v. Holt, 1 suppressed one written and two oral statements made by the defendant-appellee, Julius Evans. We affirm the trial court’s suppression of two of the statements because they were a product of coercion. But we hold that the remaining oral statement was not subject to suppression for that reason and remand the case for further proceedings.
I. Assault Becomes Murder
The relevant facts are not disputed. In late 1998, Evans, who was then fifteen years old, was…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited68 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Coolidge v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Ornelas v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Rhode Island v. InnisSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
63 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- State v. SwaniganSupreme Court of Kansas · 2005
- Welch v. CommonwealthKentucky Supreme Court · 2004
- State v. BrownSupreme Court of Kansas · 2008
- In Re LineberryCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
- State v. JohnsonOhio Court of Appeals · 2005
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.