Henson v. United States
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
STEADMAN, Associate Judge:
The single issue on this appeal is whether the warnings given to appellant before he made an incriminating statement to the police complied with the requirements of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). The issue arises because the officer administering the warnings expanded upon the standard form found in PD-47, the Metropolitan Police Department card used for that purpose.
Specifically, the officer testified that he advised appellant as follows:
(Reading) You are under arrest. Before we ask you any questions, you must understand what…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Duckworth v. EaganSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- California v. PrysockSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Gary James Eagan v. Jack R. Duckworth, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1988
- United States v. RawlsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1974
3Cited by3 opinions
- Rush v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2008
- Green v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2024
- Rush v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2008