OREGON V. ELSTAD
470 U.S. 298 (1985)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This is an appeal from the suppression of evidence from an initial
violation of Miranda.
FACTS: A house was burglarized. A witness contacted the sheriff's office, implicating
Elstad (D). Officers Burke and McAllister went to D's house with a warrant for his arrest.
Burke sat down with D in the living room, and without telling him that he had a warrant for
his arrest, stated that he 'felt' that D was involved in the burglary. D replied, 'Yes, I
was there.' D was transported to headquarters. An hour later, McAllister, in the presence of
Burke, advised D of his Miranda rights for the first time. D agreed to talk and signed a
statement. The trial judge excluded the remark D made in his living room, but admitted the
statement made at the sheriff's office. D was convicted. The Oregon Court of Appeals
reversed, stating that there wasn't a sufficient break in the stream of events between the
inadmissible statement in the living room and the written confession in the sheriff's
office. The State (P) appealed.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment