13 Wisconsin opinions name it 2 courts 1962–2026 5 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Wisconsin courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
J. D. B. v. North Carolinagreen2 sentences2024It is also appropriate to consider Kevin’s age in the custody analysis because “[i]t is beyond dispute that children will often feel bound to submit to police questioning when an adult in the same circumstances would feel free to leave.” See J.D.B. v. North Carolina, 564 U.S. 261, 264-65 (2011). ¶21 The State bears the burden of proving that Kevin was not in custody by a preponderance of the evidence. 2019See J.D.B. v. North Carolina, 564 U.S. 261, 275-77 (2011). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Harrisgreen2 sentences2024See State v. Harris, 2016 WI App 2, ¶9 , 366 Wis. 2d 777 , 874 N.W.2d 602 (2015), aff’d, 2017 WI 31 , 374 Wis. 2d 271 , 892 N.W.2d 663 . ¶22 To begin, this court must keep Kevin’s age—twelve at the time of the interviews—in mind when considering whether a reasonable person in his shoes would have felt free to end the interviews. 2024See State v. Harris, 2016 WI App 2, ¶9 , 366 Wis. 2d 777 , 874 N.W.2d 602 (2015), aff’d, 2017 WI 31 , 374 Wis. 2d 271 , 892 N.W.2d 663 . ¶22 To begin, this court must keep Kevin’s age—twelve at the time of the interviews—in mind when considering whether a reasonable person in his shoes would have felt free to end the interviews. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Brian I. Harrisgreen2 sentences2024See State v. Harris, 2016 WI App 2, ¶9 , 366 Wis. 2d 777 , 874 N.W.2d 602 (2015), aff’d, 2017 WI 31 , 374 Wis. 2d 271 , 892 N.W.2d 663 . ¶22 To begin, this court must keep Kevin’s age—twelve at the time of the interviews—in mind when considering whether a reasonable person in his shoes would have felt free to end the interviews. 2024See State v. Harris, 2016 WI App 2, ¶9 , 366 Wis. 2d 777 , 874 N.W.2d 602 (2015), aff’d, 2017 WI 31 , 374 Wis. 2d 271 , 892 N.W.2d 663 . ¶22 To begin, this court must keep Kevin’s age—twelve at the time of the interviews—in mind when considering whether a reasonable person in his shoes would have felt free to end the interviews. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Timothy E. Dobbsgreen2 sentences2022This inquiry “is simply the first step in the analysis, not the last.” “[T]he freedom- of-movement test identifies only a necessary and not a sufficient condition for Miranda custody.” Instead, courts proceed to the second step in the custody analysis where they ask “whether the relevant environment presents the same inherently coercive pressures as the type of station house questioning at issue in Miranda.” State v. Halverson, 2021 WI 7, ¶¶13-14, 16-17 , 395 Wis. 2d 385 , 953 N.W.2d 847 (alterations in original, footnote and citations omitted); see also State v. Dobbs, 2020 WI 64 , 392 Wis. 2 2022This inquiry “is simply the first step in the analysis, not the last.” “[T]he freedom- of-movement test identifies only a necessary and not a sufficient condition for Miranda custody.” Instead, courts proceed to the second step in the custody analysis where they ask “whether the relevant environment presents the same inherently coercive pressures as the type of station house questioning at issue in Miranda.” State v. Halverson, 2021 WI 7, ¶¶13-14, 16-17 , 395 Wis. 2d 385 , 953 N.W.2d 847 (alterations in original, footnote and citations omitted); see also State v. Dobbs, 2020 WI 64 , 392 Wis. 2 | 1 | 1 |
State v. Brian L. Halversongreen2 sentences2022This inquiry “is simply the first step in the analysis, not the last.” “[T]he freedom- of-movement test identifies only a necessary and not a sufficient condition for Miranda custody.” Instead, courts proceed to the second step in the custody analysis where they ask “whether the relevant environment presents the same inherently coercive pressures as the type of station house questioning at issue in Miranda.” State v. Halverson, 2021 WI 7, ¶¶13-14, 16-17 , 395 Wis. 2d 385 , 953 N.W.2d 847 (alterations in original, footnote and citations omitted); see also State v. Dobbs, 2020 WI 64 , 392 Wis. 2 2022This inquiry “is simply the first step in the analysis, not the last.” “[T]he freedom- of-movement test identifies only a necessary and not a sufficient condition for Miranda custody.” Instead, courts proceed to the second step in the custody analysis where they ask “whether the relevant environment presents the same inherently coercive pressures as the type of station house questioning at issue in Miranda.” State v. Halverson, 2021 WI 7, ¶¶13-14, 16-17 , 395 Wis. 2d 385 , 953 N.W.2d 847 (alterations in original, footnote and citations omitted); see also State v. Dobbs, 2020 WI 64 , 392 Wis. 2 | 1 | 1 |
State v. Gruengreen1 sentence2022See Gruen, 218 Wis. 2d at 593 . | 1 | 1 |
California v. Behelergreen1 sentence2022This inquiry “is simply the first step in the analysis, not the last.” “[T]he freedom- of-movement test identifies only a necessary and not a sufficient condition for Miranda custody.” Instead, courts proceed to the second step in the custody analysis where they ask “whether the relevant environment presents the same inherently coercive pressures as the type of station house questioning at issue in Miranda.” State v. Halverson, 2021 WI 7, ¶¶13-14, 16-17 , 395 Wis. 2d 385 , 953 N.W.2d 847 (alterations in original, footnote and citations omitted); see also State v. Dobbs, 2020 WI 64 , 392 Wis. 2 | 1 | 1 |
Shainwald v. Shainwaldgreen1 sentence1992See, e.g., Beran v. Beran, 450 N.W.2d 688, 691 (Neb. 1990); Shainwald v. Shainwald, 395 S.E.2d 441, 443-44 (S.C. | 1 | 1 |
Beran v. Berangreen1 sentence1992See, e.g., Beran v. Beran, 450 N.W.2d 688, 691 (Neb. 1990); Shainwald v. Shainwald, 395 S.E.2d 441, 443-44 (S.C. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wisconsin. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Howes v. Fields
green
2 sentences2021The record does not reveal any restraint upon Halverson any more than in his daily life as an inmate. ¶35 For many of the same reasons, proceeding to the second step of the custody analysis, we conclude Halverson's environment did not "present[] the same inherently coercive pressures as the type of station house questioning at issue in 18 No. 2018AP858-CR Miranda." Howes, 565 U.S. at 509 ; see also Bartelt, 379 Wis. 2d 588 , ¶33. 2021Instead, courts proceed to the second step in the custody analysis where they ask "whether the relevant environment presents the same inherently coercive pressures as the type of station house questioning at issue in Miranda." Howes, 565 U.S. at 509 . | 2 | 2021–2024 |
State v. Koput
green
2 sentences2018Because Bartelt was not in custody when he asked about counsel, his Fifth Amendment right to counsel did not attach. 14 Koput goes on to state, "It was only then that a reasonable person viewing the situation objectively would conclude that he was not free to leave but was in custody." State v. Koput, 142 Wis. 2d 370, 380 , 418 N.W.2d 804 (1988). 2018Because Bartelt was not in custody when he asked about counsel, his Fifth Amendment right to counsel did not attach. 14 Koput goes on to state, "It was only then that a reasonable person viewing the situation objectively would conclude that he was not free to leave but was in custody." State v. Koput, 142 Wis. 2d 370, 380 , 418 N.W.2d 804 (1988). | 2 | 2018–2018 |
United States v. Patane
green
1 sentence2026Contrary to McMahon’s argument, Knapp II explicitly provides the following: “[W]e reinstate all portions of our decision in [Knapp I that were] not implicated by the Supreme Court’s order vacating our decision in light of United States v. Patane, 542 U.S. 630 (2004).” Knapp II, 285 Wis. 2d 86 , ¶2 n.3. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
State v. Knapp
green
1 sentence2026Contrary to McMahon’s argument, Knapp II explicitly provides the following: “[W]e reinstate all portions of our decision in [Knapp I that were] not implicated by the Supreme Court’s order vacating our decision in light of United States v. Patane, 542 U.S. 630 (2004).” Knapp II, 285 Wis. 2d 86 , ¶2 n.3. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Barstad v. Frazier
green
1 sentence2010Id. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
State v. Magnuson
green
2 sentences2004Citing Magnuson, 233 Wis. 2d 40, ¶ 25 , the majority determines that Thorson also must be subject to an escape charge for leaving that custody. 2004Citing Magnuson, 233 Wis. 2d 40, ¶25 , the majority determines that Thorson also must be subject to an escape charge for leaving that custody. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
United States v. Henry
green
1 sentence2002United States v. Henry, 447 U.S. 264 , 273 n.11 (1980). | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Elies v. Elies
green
2 sentences1962Elies v. Elies (1941), 239 Wis. 60 , 300 N. W. 493 . 1962Elies v. Elies (1941), 239 Wis. 60 , 300 N. W. 493 . | 1 | 1962–1962 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.