statement taken violation (New Jersey) · Go Syfert
← New Jersey issues

statement taken violation in New Jersey

7 New Jersey opinions name it 2 courts 1986–2022 3 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by New Jersey 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.

Followed or applied (4)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Burrisgreen
nj · 1996 · cited in 5 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2003–2022
2 sentences

2022Burris, 145 N.J. at 529 .

2022State v. Burris, 145 N.J. 509, 535 (1996).

25
State v. Gossergreen
nj · 1967 · cited in 2 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1986–2002
2 sentences

2002See State v. Gosser, 50 N.J. 438, 445-46 , 236 A.2d 377 (1967), cert. denied, 390 U.S. 1035 , 88 S.Ct. 1434 , 20 L.Ed.2d 295 (1968) (exclusionary rule of Miranda bars from evidence statements made by a defendant during in-custody interrogation unless he has been advised of his Miranda rights and knowingly and intelligently waived such rights); State v. Vigliano, 50 N.J. 51, 64 , 232 A.2d 129 (1967) (evidence obtained in the absence of prescribed Miranda warnings is inadmissible); State v. Lutz, 165 N.J.Super. 278, 283-84 , 398 A.2d 115 (App.Div.1979) (in the absence of Miranda warnings stateme

2002See State v. Gosser, 50 N.J. 438, 445-46 , 236 A.2d 377 (1967), cert. denied, 390 U.S. 1035 , 88 S.Ct. 1434 , 20 L.Ed.2d 295 (1968) (exclusionary rule of Miranda bars from evidence statements made by a defendant during in-custody interrogation unless he has been advised of his Miranda rights and knowingly and intelligently waived such rights); State v. Vigliano, 50 N.J. 51, 64 , 232 A.2d 129 (1967) (evidence obtained in the absence of prescribed Miranda warnings is inadmissible); State v. Lutz, 165 N.J.Super. 278, 283-84 , 398 A.2d 115 (App.Div.1979) (in the absence of Miranda warnings stateme

22
Tucker v. United Statesgreen
scotus · 1968 · cited in 2 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1986–2002
2 sentences

2002See State v. Gosser, 50 N.J. 438, 445-46 , 236 A.2d 377 (1967), cert. denied, 390 U.S. 1035 , 88 S.Ct. 1434 , 20 L.Ed.2d 295 (1968) (exclusionary rule of Miranda bars from evidence statements made by a defendant during in-custody interrogation unless he has been advised of his Miranda rights and knowingly and intelligently waived such rights); State v. Vigliano, 50 N.J. 51, 64 , 232 A.2d 129 (1967) (evidence obtained in the absence of prescribed Miranda warnings is inadmissible); State v. Lutz, 165 N.J.Super. 278, 283-84 , 398 A.2d 115 (App.Div.1979) (in the absence of Miranda warnings stateme

2002See State v. Gosser, 50 N.J. 438, 445-46 , 236 A. 2d 377 (1967), cert. denied, 390 U.S. 1035 , 88 S.Ct. 1434 , 20 L.Ed. 2d 295 (1968) (exclusionary rule of Miranda bars from evidence statements made by a defendant during in-custody interrogation unless he has been advised of his Miranda rights and knowingly and intelligently waived such rights); State v. Vigliano, 50 N.J. 51, 64 , 232 A. 2d 129 (1967) (evidence obtained in the absence of prescribed Miranda warnings is inadmissible); State v. Lutz, 165 N.J.Super. 278, 283-84 , 398 A. 2d 115 (App.Div.1979) (in the absence of Miranda warnings sta

22
State v. Viglianogreen
nj · 1967 · cited in 2 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1986–2002
2 sentences

2002See State v. Gosser, 50 N.J. 438, 445-46 , 236 A.2d 377 (1967), cert. denied, 390 U.S. 1035 , 88 S.Ct. 1434 , 20 L.Ed.2d 295 (1968) (exclusionary rule of Miranda bars from evidence statements made by a defendant during in-custody interrogation unless he has been advised of his Miranda rights and knowingly and intelligently waived such rights); State v. Vigliano, 50 N.J. 51, 64 , 232 A.2d 129 (1967) (evidence obtained in the absence of prescribed Miranda warnings is inadmissible); State v. Lutz, 165 N.J.Super. 278, 283-84 , 398 A.2d 115 (App.Div.1979) (in the absence of Miranda warnings stateme

2002See State v. Gosser, 50 N.J. 438, 445-46 , 236 A.2d 377 (1967), cert. denied, 390 U.S. 1035 , 88 S.Ct. 1434 , 20 L.Ed.2d 295 (1968) (exclusionary rule of Miranda bars from evidence statements made by a defendant during in-custody interrogation unless he has been advised of his Miranda rights and knowingly and intelligently waived such rights); State v. Vigliano, 50 N.J. 51, 64 , 232 A.2d 129 (1967) (evidence obtained in the absence of prescribed Miranda warnings is inadmissible); State v. Lutz, 165 N.J.Super. 278, 283-84 , 398 A.2d 115 (App.Div.1979) (in the absence of Miranda warnings stateme

12

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Jersey. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Hartley green
nj · 1986
2 sentences

2003State v. Burris, supra, 145 N.J. at 520, 526-29 , 679 A. 2d 121 ; Hartley, supra, 103 N.J. at 261 , 511 A. 2d 80 . [12] In Fulminante a narrowly divided court (5S-4) held that admission of an involuntary confession was subject to harmless error analysis.

2003State v. Burris, supra, 145 N.J. at 520, 526-29 , 679 A. 2d 121 ; Hartley, supra, 103 N.J. at 261 , 511 A. 2d 80 . [12] In Fulminante a narrowly divided court (5S-4) held that admission of an involuntary confession was subject to harmless error analysis.

22002–2003
State v. Lutz green
njsuperctappdiv · 1979
2 sentences

2002See State v. Gosser, 50 N.J. 438, 445-46 , 236 A.2d 377 (1967), cert. denied, 390 U.S. 1035 , 88 S.Ct. 1434 , 20 L.Ed.2d 295 (1968) (exclusionary rule of Miranda bars from evidence statements made by a defendant during in-custody interrogation unless he has been advised of his Miranda rights and knowingly and intelligently waived such rights); State v. Vigliano, 50 N.J. 51, 64 , 232 A.2d 129 (1967) (evidence obtained in the absence of prescribed Miranda warnings is inadmissible); State v. Lutz, 165 N.J.Super. 278, 283-84 , 398 A.2d 115 (App.Div.1979) (in the absence of Miranda warnings stateme

2002See State v. Gosser, 50 N.J. 438, 445-46 , 236 A.2d 377 (1967), cert. denied, 390 U.S. 1035 , 88 S.Ct. 1434 , 20 L.Ed.2d 295 (1968) (exclusionary rule of Miranda bars from evidence statements made by a defendant during in-custody interrogation unless he has been advised of his Miranda rights and knowingly and intelligently waived such rights); State v. Vigliano, 50 N.J. 51, 64 , 232 A.2d 129 (1967) (evidence obtained in the absence of prescribed Miranda warnings is inadmissible); State v. Lutz, 165 N.J.Super. 278, 283-84 , 398 A.2d 115 (App.Div.1979) (in the absence of Miranda warnings stateme

12002–2002

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NJ § N.J. Stat. § 2C:39-4 (4) NJ § N.J. Stat. § 2C:39-5 (4) NJ § N.J. Stat. § 2C:43-7.2 (4) NJ § N.J. Stat. § 2C:15-1 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

TX 28 (1997–2024) CA 12 (1974–2022) IL 12 (1973–2024) NJ 7 (1986–2022) IN 5 (1977–1980) OH 3 (1999–2006) NM 3 (1971–2020) WI 3 (1990–1996) NC 3 (1989–2016) MN 2 (1997–2017) GA 2 (2006–2023) MD 2 (2002–2017) WA 2 (2001–2001) AL 2 (1990–2010) MI 2 (1994–2013)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check