Ascent Aviation, LLC, Michael D. King and Karen King v. Dovenator Holdings, LLC

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the objective circumstances must be examined to determine whether the suspect was deprived of his freedom in a significant way
• holding that statements Hernandez made during a standoff after an attempted jail break were not the result of custodial interrogation
• holding that the court looks to “the objective circumstances of the interrogation, not on the subjective views” of the questioning officers or the defendant
• holding that the “ultimate inquiry” in determining whether a person is in custody for purposes of Miranda is whether there was a “formal arrest or restraint on freedom of movement associated with a formal arrest”
• holding that a law enforcement officer’s unarticulated subjective belief as to whether the person being questioned is a criminal suspect is irrelevant to the custody determination because a custody assessment depends on the objective circumstances of an interrogation
• concluding that in determining whether a person is “in custody” for Miranda purposes, a court must determine whether there had been either a formal arrest or a “restraint on freedom of movement of the degree associated with a formal arrest” (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).