Legal Opinion · Dissent

Carroll v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided March 19, 1993No. A92A1756Published

1DissentCooper, Judge

I respectfully dissent. It is my view that the detective’s involvement in the initial interview at appellant’s home required the giving of Miranda warnings.

“Miranda warnings are not limited to station-house interrogations as long as there is some significant deprivation of an individual’s freedom of action. . . .” Aldridge v. State, 247 Ga. 142, 144 (2) (274 SE2d 525) (1981). The State contends that appellant was not “in custody” in her home during the initial interview and that it is not practical or legally necessary to extend Miranda to the initial inquiry at the scene of a child abuse…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Shy v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1975
  2. Aldridge v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1980
  3. State v. OverbySupreme Court of Georgia · 1982
  4. Banther v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1987
  5. Rucker v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1992

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API