Haines, Rodney

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 defendant impliedly waived his Miranda rights because he “chose to speak with the officers in the hope of obtaining leniency”
• holding that “the Constitution certainly does not mandate” a “policy of recording all custodial interrogations”
• holding that Riley does not alter the consent analysis for cell phone searches
• concluding that a defendant’s verbal consent to a search of his cell phone extended to a forensic examination of the phone where (1) the purpose of the search was to investigate the defendant’s recent drug sales, (2
• noting that the question of whether a defendant acted strategically in refusing to sign a form acknowledging his Miranda rights was a fact issue re- viewed for clear error
• noting that the Supreme Court has not overruled Watts, which is still binding authority

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).