Ralph v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that defendant did not rely on inducement because eight hours elapsed between inducement and incriminating statement
• concluding that defendant did not rely on inducement because eight hours elapsed between inducement and incriminating statement
• holding that officer’s statement to suspect in custody that “it would be better if [the defendant] told the truth” was a mere exhortation to be truthful that did not render the suspect’s subsequent statement involuntary
• but see Ralph v. Warden, 438 F.2d 786 (4th Cir.1970), cert. denied, 408 U.S. 942, 92 S.Ct. 2869, 33 L.Ed.2d 766 (1972)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).