State v. Hieu Tran
Supreme Court of Vermont
1Opinion of the CourtSkoglund, J.
¶ 1. This interlocutory appeal raises the question of whether defendant Hieu Tran was in police custody when two detectives questioned him in a police cruiser for one hour as part of an investigation into an assault and attempted robbery. The trial court concluded that the interview was a custodial interrogation conducted without the warnings guaranteed by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), and granted defendant’s motion to suppress. On appeal, the State argues that no warnings were necessary because defendant voluntarily spoke with detectives and was not in custody during the…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Oregon v. MathiasonSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Thompson v. KeohaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- United States v. Leonard David GriffinCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1990
- United States v. Aaron L. SalvoCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1998
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- State v. SullivanSupreme Court of Vermont · 2013
- State of New Hampshire v. Timothy McKennaSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2014
- State v. Rein KoltsSupreme Court of Vermont · 2018
- State v. John PowersSupreme Court of Vermont · 2016
- In re E.W.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2015
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.