People v. Baltimore

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “[o]ther circumstances contribute to our determination that the defendant understood his rights carried over from the previous interview” including “[t]he place of interrogation [being] the same for both interviews”
• finding that the passage of three days from the defendant’s Miranda warnings and waiver to the time of his non-Mirandized inculpatory statements was not so stale or remote as to require fresh Miranda warnings

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Frazier
  South Dakota Supreme Court· 2001-02-21· cited 55×
• People v. Cordevant
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1998-06-19· cited 14×
• People v. Eggleston
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2006-01-25· cited 4×
• People v. Godfrey
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2008-05-23· cited 3×

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• People v. Nitz
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1991-03-28· cited 230×
• People v. Garcia
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1995-03-23· cited 109×
• People v. Frazier
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1993-07-29· cited 47×
• People v. Parsons
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1991-12-06· cited 21×
• People v. Woods
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1993-02-24· cited 17×