Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 3/24/2010

Carter v. State

Citations

309 S.W.3d 31
2010 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 101
2010 WL 1050319

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 deliberate employment of a “question first, warn later” interview technique will call for the suppression of a suspect’s unwarned and warned statements
holding that trial court’s finding that defendant’s statement was voluntarily made supported trial court’s admission of statement despite mid- Miranda warning
providing that “a trial court’s determination of historical facts based on a videotape recording is still reviewed under a deferential standard”
providing that “a trial court’s determination of historical facts based on a videotape recording is still reviewed under a deferential standard”
suggesting that, though express waiver is not required, \interrogating officers should request an express waiver of Miranda rights to avoid later litigation and the possible exclusion of incriminating statements\
suggesting that, though express waiver is not required, “interrogating officers should request an express waiver of Miranda rights to avoid later litigation and the possible exclusion of incriminating statements”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cochran

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

111 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

27 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.