27 Cited authorities

  1. Miranda v. Arizona

    384 U.S. 436 (1966)   Cited 55,478 times   60 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a suspect "must be clearly informed that he has the right to consult with a lawyer and to have the lawyer with him during interrogation"
  2. Chapman v. California

    386 U.S. 18 (1967)   Cited 21,696 times   28 Legal Analyses
    Holding that error is harmless only if "harmless beyond a reasonable doubt"
  3. Arizona v. Fulminante

    499 U.S. 279 (1991)   Cited 4,635 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the doctrine of harmless error applies to the violation of the defendant’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination through the admission at trial of an involuntary confession
  4. Edwards v. Arizona

    451 U.S. 477 (1981)   Cited 5,994 times   25 Legal Analyses
    Holding statement "I want an attorney before making a deal" triggered Miranda rights
  5. Berkemer v. McCarty

    468 U.S. 420 (1984)   Cited 4,893 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding the "noncoercive aspect of ordinary traffic stops prompts us to hold that persons temporarily detained pursuant to such stops are not ‘in custody’ for the purposes of Miranda "
  6. Rhode Island v. Innis

    446 U.S. 291 (1980)   Cited 5,408 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a police officer's subjective intent to obtain incriminatory statements is not relevant to determining whether an interrogation has occurred
  7. McNeil v. Wisconsin

    501 U.S. 171 (1991)   Cited 1,586 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Sixth Amendment's right to counsel is "offense specific," and once invoked, does not automatically apply to all future charges.
  8. New York v. Quarles

    467 U.S. 649 (1984)   Cited 1,383 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an officer's subjective motivation is irrelevant to determining the applicability of the public safety exception to Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694
  9. Pennsylvania v. Muniz

    496 U.S. 582 (1990)   Cited 992 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an officer did not interrogate a suspect by asking him to take a breathalyzer test and explaining the legal consequences of refusing
  10. Oregon v. Bradshaw

    462 U.S. 1039 (1983)   Cited 1,110 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a defendant can negate his earlier invocation of his Miranda rights by initiating a conversation
  11. Section 28

    Cal. Const. art. I § 28   Cited 1,598 times
    Establishing the state constitutional right of victims "[t]o prevent the disclosure of confidential information or records to the defendant.... which could be used to locate or harass the victim.... or which are otherwise privileged or confidential by law"
  12. Rule 8.520 - Briefs by parties and amici curiae; judicial notice

    Cal. R. 8.520   Cited 2,149 times

    (a)Parties' briefs; time to file (1) Within 30 days after the Supreme Court files the order of review, the petitioner must serve and file in that court either an opening brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (2) Within 30 days after the petitioner files its brief or the time to do so expires, the opposing party must serve and file either an answer brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (3) The petitioner may file a reply brief on the merits or