Radovsky 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 after Radovsky had invoked his right to counsel, the police improperly initiated custodial interrogation in violation of Edwards
• holding that “the defendant’s right to have counsel during interrogation was violated, under the principles of Edwards and Miranda, and thus all evidence obtained from Radovsky subsequent to his request for counsel should have been suppressed”
• noting per se rule precluding police-initiated interrogation after an arrestee has expressed a desire for the assistance of counsel

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).