Klemz v. State

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 probation officer’s questions subjected the defendant to custodial interrogation because the questions were reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response
• holding that the probation officer’s questions subjected the defendant to custodial interrogation because the questions were reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response
• suggesting that in a prison context, a question does not constitute interrogation under Miranda when question is purely administrative and not likely to elicit an incriminating response

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).