Legal Opinion

People v. Elizalde

California Supreme Court

Decided June 25, 2015No. S215260PublishedCited by 67 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

CORRIGAN, J.

Under the rule of Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436, 478-479 [16 L.Ed.2d 694, 86 S.Ct. 1602] (Miranda), certain admonitions must be given before a suspect’s statement made during custodial interrogation can be admitted in the prosecution’s case-in-chief. Here we consider whether routine questions about gang affiliation, posed to defendant while processing him into jail on murder charges, come within Miranda’s well-recognized booking exception. We hold that the questions exceeded the scope of the exception and that officers should have known these questions were…

2Cases cited44 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  4. Edwards v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  5. Arizona v. FulminanteSupreme Court of the United States · 1991

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

3Cited by67 opinions

  1. Martin Valdez, Jr. v. W. MontgomeryCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
  2. People v. EdwardCalifornia Supreme Court · 2018
  3. United States v. Alfonzo WilliamsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
  4. People v. LaraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
  5. People v. HendersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2020

62 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