Legal Opinion

Pulaski v. State

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided June 30, 1964PublishedCited by 41 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHallows, J.

Reversible error is claimed in admitting the confession of Pulaski in evidence because it was not the voluntary product of his free and unconstrained will. This confession related only to four of the seven burglaries, i.e those involved in counts 4, 5, 6, and 7. It is argued the confession was not voluntary because of the length of time Pulaski was questioned, the interrogations took place in a room 10 feet by 10 feet, he had little sleep until after 6 o’clock a. m. on the day he made the confession, nine different officers questioned him, the only food he had from the time of his arrest…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Fahy v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Culombe v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  3. Hirabayashi v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  4. United States v. JohnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  5. United States v. Trenton Potteries Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1927

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by41 opinions

  1. Whitty v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
  2. State Ex Rel. Goodchild v. BurkeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Wold v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
  4. State v. StevensWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
  5. State v. StricklandWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965

36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API