Delhotal v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that questioning 11 Appellate Case: 24-4058 Document: 48-1 Date Filed: 06/03/2025 Page: 12 was not coercive in part because officers did not speak in a threatening tone
• finding a suspect not in a police-dominated environment when questioned about an explosive device, in part because the suspect “moved freely about his home” and his “father and brother were also present”
• noting that “[v]ertical stare de- cisis is absolute”
• “Of course, it is not always possible to identify the opinion that is a logical subset of the other concurring opinion(s
• “It is difficult to ignore the effect that [the officers’] accusatory questioning had on the nature of the interrogation.”
• defendant’s father, owner of the subject premises, had common authority to grant consent to search the son’s bedroom

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).