State v. Herrera
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Opinion of the Court
SALARIO, Judge.
The State charged Emerson Herrera with being an accessory after the fact to murder. Mr. Herrera was sixteen years old at the time of the alleged offense. The trial court granted a motion to suppress his confession, holding that the State failed to prove that Mr. Herrera had knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). Reviewing de novo the legal question of whether the Miranda waiver was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, we reverse.
I
This prosecution arises from the murder of a…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Colorado v. ConnellySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Moran v. BurbineSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Fare v. Michael C.Supreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Connor v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2001
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- JEFFERY WATERMAN v. STATE OF FLORIDADistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2018