Legal Opinion
State v. Mirquet
Utah Supreme Court
Decided March 27, 1996No. 930098PublishedCited by 30 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
AMENDED OPINION
STEWART, Associate Chief Justice:
This Court granted certiorari to review a Court of Appeals decision affirming the trial court’s suppression of physical evidence obtained as a result of what both courts held to be a custodial interrogation of defendant in which no Miranda 1 warning was given. State v. Mirquet, 844 P.2d 995, 1001 (Utah Ct.App.1992), cert. granted, 857 P.2d 948 (Utah 1993). We affirmed the Court of Appeals’ decision and issued our opinion on June 30, 1995. Subsequently, the State filed a petition for rehearing, primarily to seek clarification of the standards…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- United States v. MendenhallSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Berkemer v. McCartySupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Oregon v. MathiasonSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Stansbury v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- Drinkard v. WalkerSupreme Court of Georgia · 2006
- People v. MathenySupreme Court of Colorado · 2002
- State v. ElisonMontana Supreme Court · 2000
- State v. LevinUtah Supreme Court · 2006
- Layton City v. CarrCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2014
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.