Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Campbell v. State

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided January 14, 2005No. 13A01-0308-CR-289Published

1ConcurrenceRobb, Judge

I concur, but write separately to emphasize that our holding with respect to the Miranda issue is specific to the unique facts of this case.

63 We commonly say that a person is "in custody" for purposes of Miranda if the individual's freedom has been deprived in a significant way or if a reasonable person in the circumstances would believe that he or she is not free to leave. See Mesarosh v. State, 801 N.E.2d 200, 202 (Ind.Ct.App. 2004). In this case, Campbell's freedom clearly was deprived in a significant way and no reasonable person in his circumstances would believe that he was free to…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Mesarosh v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2004

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

Powered by the Exa API