Marks v. State Road Commission

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that defendant not in custody where three officers came to interview h i m
• holding that a \threat is one that a reasonable recipient familiar with the context of the communication would find threatening\
• holding that pro se appellant “waived” his argument because it was not developed
• indicating that the lack of restraint on defendant’s movement favored a finding that defendant was not in custody
• providing that evidence of other crimes, wrongs or acts “may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of ... intent, ... knowledge, ... or absence of mistake or accident”
• considering circumstances leading up to alleged threatening statements in determining whether a reasonable jury could convict the defendant under a criminal threat statute

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).