Stansbury v. California

Robert Edward Stansbury v. California

Argued March 30, 1994
Decided April 26, 1994
Full case name Robert Edward Stansbury v. California
Citations

511 U.S. 318 (more)

Argument Oral argument
Prior history Defendant convicted; Calif. Sup. Ct. affirms
Subsequent history Case remanded to trial court.
Holding
The test for custody under Miranda v. Arizona is whether there was a formal arrest or restraint on freedom of movement of the degree associated with a formal arrest. The subjective views harbored by either the interrogating officers or the person being questioned are irrelevant. The key inquiry should be whether the individual had been placed under formal arrest, or whether the restraint placed on the individual's freedom of movement rose to the level of a formal arrest.
Court membership
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Case opinions
Per curiam.
Concurrence Blackmun
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. V

Stansbury v. California, 511 U.S. 318 (1994), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court considered whether a police officer's subjective and undisclosed opinion whether a person who had been questioned was a suspect was relevant in determining whether that person had been in custody and thus entitled to the Miranda warnings.[1] In a 9-0 ruling, the Court reversed and remanded the case. In a per curiam decision, the Court held that "an officer's subjective and undisclosed view concerning whether the person being interrogated is a suspect is irrelevant to the assessment [of] whether the person is in custody."[2]

References

  1. ↑ "Stansbury v. California, 511 U.S. 318 (1994)". Retrieved 2014-08-01.
  2. ↑ "Stansbury v. California :: 511 U.S. 318 (1994) :: Justia US Supreme Court Center". Retrieved 2014-08-01.
This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 6/6/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.