Skip to main content

Payne v. State

Citations

  • 854 N.E.2d 7
  • 2006 Ind. App. LEXIS 1791
  • 2006 WL 2506492

How courts have described this case

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

  • finding a Seibert violation because police “waited to advise [the defendant] of her Miranda warnings until she essentially had divulged her entire involvement”
  • finding a Seibert violation because police “waited to advise [the defendant] of her Miranda warnings until she essentially had divulged her entire involvement”
  • finding a Seibert violation because police “waited to advise [the defendant] of her Miranda warnings until she essentially had divulged her entire involvement”
  • finding a Seibert violation because police “waited to advise [the defendant] of her Miranda warnings until she essentially had divulged her entire involvement”
  • finding a Seibert violation when pre-Miranda questioning lasted seven hours
  • “[T]he mistake of fact defense is available where the defendant, acting under a reasonable and honest mistake concerning a fact or facts commits an act which, if the facts were as the defendant believed them to be, would not be criminal.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Riley, Sharpnack, Barnes

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.