44 Cited authorities

Miranda v. Arizona
384 U.S. 436 (1966) Cited 60,244 times 64 Legal Analyses
Holding that statements obtained by custodial interrogation of a criminal defendant without warning of constitutional rights are inadmissible under the Fifth Amendment
Colorado v. Connelly
479 U.S. 157 (1986) Cited 4,817 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that the government bears the burden of proving the validity of a Miranda waiver by a preponderance of the evidence
People v. Mateo
2 N.Y.3d 383 (N.Y. 2004) Cited 3,446 times 2 Legal Analyses
Finding criminal liability attaches to "a person concerned in the commission of a crime whether he directly commits the act constituting the offense or aids and abets in its commission . . ."
Culombe v. Connecticut
367 U.S. 568 (1961) Cited 1,441 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding involuntary the confession extracted from a “thirty-three-year-old mental defective ... with an intelligence quotient of sixty-four”
Carter v. Kentucky
450 U.S. 288 (1981) Cited 474 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that a no-adverse-inference instruction is required under the Fifth Amendment if timely requested
People v. Gonzalez
68 N.Y.2d 424 (N.Y. 1986) Cited 984 times 2 Legal Analyses
In People v Gonzalez (68 NY2d 424 [1986]), we set forth the conditions necessary to warrant a missing witness charge and a burden-shifting analysis to determine whether those conditions are met.
People v. Whalen
59 N.Y.2d 273 (N.Y. 1983) Cited 446 times 1 Legal Analyses
In Whalen, the defendant argued that identification evidence is "always suspect, so that, when a trial involves a close question of identity, the jury should receive an instruction emphasizing the scrutiny to be given to such evidence.
People v. Anderson
42 N.Y.2d 35 (N.Y. 1977) Cited 467 times
Holding that incommunicado detention for nineteen hours during which defendant was deprived of sleep and food while interrogators worked in relays was coercive and "the use of his confession offends due process"
Commonwealth v. DiGiambattista
442 Mass. 423 (Mass. 2004) Cited 188 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that when the prosecution introduces evidence of a defendant's custodial confession and there is not an audio recording of the complete interrogation, upon request, the defendant is entitled to a cautionary instruction "that the State's highest court has expressed a preference that such interrogations be recorded," and the jury should weigh "the evidence of the defendant's alleged statement with great caution and care"
Commonwealth v. Barbosa
457 Mass. 773 (Mass. 2010) Cited 142 times
In Barbosa, supra at 780–793, 933 N.E.2d 93, we employed the same reasoning that we used in Nardi in the context of an expert witness testifying to DNA test results, as opposed to autopsy results, of a nontestifying DNA analyst.
Section 725 ILCS 5/103-2.1 - When statements by accused may be used
725 ILCS 5/103-2.1 Cited 86 times 2 Legal Analyses
Establishing that any oral or written statement of an accused shall be presumed inadmissible as evidence in a criminal proceeding for homicide unless "an electronic recording is made of the custodial interrogation" and such recording "is substantially accurate and not intentionally altered"
Section 968.073 - Recording custodial interrogations
Wis. Stat. § 968.073 Cited 25 times
(1) In this section: (a) "Custodial interrogation" means an interrogation by a law enforcement officer or an agent of a law enforcement agency of a person suspected of committing a crime from the time the suspect is or should be informed of his or her rights to counsel and to remain silent until the questioning ends, during which the officer or agent asks a question that is reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response and during which a reasonable person in the suspect's position would believe
Section 763.7 - Definitions
Mich. Comp. Laws § 763.7 Cited 17 times 1 Legal Analyses
As used in this section and sections 8 to 10 of this chapter: (a) "Custodial detention" means an individual's being in a place of detention because a law enforcement official has told the individual that he or she is under arrest or because the individual, under the totality of the circumstances, reasonably could believe that he or she is under a law enforcement official's control and is not free to leave. (b) "Interrogation" means questioning in a criminal investigation that may elicit a self-incriminating
Section 2-401 - "Custodial interrogation" defined
Md. Code, Crim. Proc. § 2-401 Cited 1 times
In this subtitle, "custodial interrogation" retains its judicially determined meaning. Md. Code, CP § 2-401
Rule 617 - Unrecorded Statements During Custodial Interrogation
Ind. R. Evid. 617 Cited 26 times
(a) In a felony criminal prosecution, evidence of a statement made by a person during a Custodial Interrogation in a Place of Detention shall not be admitted against the person unless an Electronic Recording of the statement was made, preserved, and is available at trial, except upon clear and convincing proof of any one of the following: (1) The statement was part of a routine processing or "booking" of the person; or (2) Before or during a Custodial Interrogation, the person agreed to respond to
Rule 3:17 - Electronic Recordation
N.J. Ct. R. 3:17 Cited 6 times
(a) Unless one of the exceptions set forth in paragraph (b) are present, all custodial interrogations conducted in a place of detention must be electronically recorded when the person being interrogated is charged with murder, kidnapping, aggravated manslaughter, manslaughter, robbery, aggravated sexual assault, sexual assault, aggravated criminal sexual contact, criminal sexual contact, second degree aggravated assault, aggravated arson, burglary, violations of Chapter 35 of Title 2C that constitute

The People, Respondent,v.Everett M. Durant, Appellant.

44 Cited authorities

Holding that statements obtained by custodial interrogation of a criminal defendant without warning of constitutional rights are inadmissible under the Fifth Amendment

Holding that the government bears the burden of proving the validity of a Miranda waiver by a preponderance of the evidence

Finding criminal liability attaches to "a person concerned in the commission of a crime whether he directly commits the act constituting the offense or aids and abets in its commission . . ."

Holding involuntary the confession extracted from a “thirty-three-year-old mental defective ... with an intelligence quotient of sixty-four”

Holding that a no-adverse-inference instruction is required under the Fifth Amendment if timely requested

In People v Gonzalez (68 NY2d 424 [1986]), we set forth the conditions necessary to warrant a missing witness charge and a burden-shifting analysis to determine whether those conditions are met.

In Whalen, the defendant argued that identification evidence is "always suspect, so that, when a trial involves a close question of identity, the jury should receive an instruction emphasizing the scrutiny to be given to such evidence.

Holding that incommunicado detention for nineteen hours during which defendant was deprived of sleep and food while interrogators worked in relays was coercive and "the use of his confession offends due process"

In Barbosa, supra at 780–793, 933 N.E.2d 93, we employed the same reasoning that we used in Nardi in the context of an expert witness testifying to DNA test results, as opposed to autopsy results, of a nontestifying DNA analyst.

Establishing that any oral or written statement of an accused shall be presumed inadmissible as evidence in a criminal proceeding for homicide unless "an electronic recording is made of the custodial interrogation" and such recording "is substantially accurate and not intentionally altered"