California Court of Appeal· 11/19/1980
People v. Nicholas
Citations
- 112 Cal. App. 3d 249
- 169 Cal. Rptr. 497
- 1980 Cal. App. LEXIS 2452
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding statement involuntary where detectives falsely implied to defendant that he faced death penalty where it did not have retroactive effect and did not apply to his case
- holding statement involuntary where detectives falsely implied to defendant that he faced death penalty where it did not have retroactive effect and did not apply to his case
- requests to turn off tape recorder and for assurances of privacy held an invocation of rights
- requests to turn off tape recorder and for assurances of privacy held an invocation of rights
- when defendant said he did not want to discuss matter but three officers repeatedly questioned him to “wear down his will,” defendant’s request to turn off tape recorder for assurances of privacy constituted an invocation of rights
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Taylor
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
18 cases in this archive cite this case.
- People v. MorrisCalifornia Supreme Court· 1991-03-28· cited 392×
- People v. CahillCalifornia Supreme Court· 1993-06-28· cited 319×
- State v. BeySupreme Court of New Jersey· 1988-08-02· cited 292×
- People v. JohnsonCalifornia Supreme Court· 1993-10-18· cited 285×
- People v. VisciottiCalifornia Supreme Court· 1992-03-12· cited 269×
- People v. StollCalifornia Supreme Court· 1989-12-18· cited 227×
- People v. PitmonCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1985-07-15· cited 115×
- State v. StangaSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 2000-09-20· cited 80×
- James v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado· 1986-11-03· cited 43×
- People v. FloresCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1983-06-09· cited 38×
- People v. VargasCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1988-10-07· cited 31×
- People v. HindsCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1984-04-06· cited 28×
- People v. HarrisCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1985-12-18· cited 27×
- People v. ForbesCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1985-12-17· cited 26×
- Baynor v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1999-08-31· cited 23×
- Bigelow v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1989-03-20· cited 19×
- Williams v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas· 1984-02-13· cited 12×
- People v. SotoCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1984-06-25· cited 9×
Cites
65 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court· 1966-06-13· cited 58,288×
- Townsend v. SainSupreme Court· 1963-03-18· cited 4,485×
- Woodson v. North CarolinaSupreme Court· 1976-07-02· cited 2,907×
- United States v. WatsonSupreme Court· 1975-10-06· cited 2,263×
- United States v. HarrisSupreme Court· 1971-06-28· cited 1,806×
- Payne v. ArkansasSupreme Court· 1958-05-19· cited 840×
- People v. IrelandCalifornia Supreme Court· 1969-02-28· cited 431×
- People v. DeVaughnCalifornia Supreme Court· 1977-01-25· cited 342×
- People v. ConleyCalifornia Supreme Court· 1966-03-15· cited 312×
- People v. GorshenCalifornia Supreme Court· 1959-03-11· cited 273×
- People v. CollinsCalifornia Supreme Court· 1976-08-06· cited 265×
- People v. JimenezCalifornia Supreme Court· 1978-06-29· cited 254×
- People v. HillCalifornia Supreme Court· 1967-04-27· cited 232×
- People v. DisbrowCalifornia Supreme Court· 1976-02-06· cited 229×
- People v. BurtonCalifornia Supreme Court· 1971-12-28· cited 217×
- People v. SchaderCalifornia Supreme Court· 1965-05-11· cited 211×
- People v. FiorittoCalifornia Supreme Court· 1968-06-20· cited 209×
- People v. WolffCalifornia Supreme Court· 1964-08-31· cited 209×
- People v. PettingillCalifornia Supreme Court· 1978-05-09· cited 181×
- People v. CantrellCalifornia Supreme Court· 1973-01-17· cited 170×
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.