legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Estupinian CA1/1
Defendant Rafael I. Estupinian was convicted of assaulting Maria C. at a house in which Maria and defendant rented rooms. During trial, the state introduced statements defendant made in a police interview subsequent to being given the warning prescribed by Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 (Miranda). Defendant contends that these statements should have been excluded because the police withheld the Miranda warnings until partway through the interview. We find substantial evidence to support the trial court’s conclusion that the police were not attempting to undermine Miranda by waiting to read defendant his rights, and affirm.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale