Reyos, James Harry

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that where defendant was subjected to an ordinary traffic stop, asked a \modest\ number of questions, and requested to perform a simple balancing test, defendant was not in custody for purposes of Miranda
• concluding that an ordinary traffic stop during which a police officer asks a driver a modest number of questions and requests him to perform a simple balancing test at a location visible to passing motorists did not involve \custody\ for purposes of Miranda rule
• holding that sobriety testing during vehicle stop was not custodial interrogation
• concluding that an ordinary traffic stop during which a police officer asks a driver a modest number of ques tions and requests him to perform a simple balancing test at a location visible to passing motorists did not involve “custody” for purposes of Miranda rule
• noting that factors relevant to whether questioning amounts to “custodial interrogation” are the location of the interrogation, whether the suspect is sequestered or held incommunicado, the number of police officers present, and the duration of the interrogation
• explaining that a traffic stop does not constitute custody for purposes of Miranda

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).