Sauerheber 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 the trial court properly considered the defendant’s criminal activity subsequent to the instant crime as an aggravating factor
• holding that the trial court properly considered the defendant’s criminal activity subsequent to the instant crime as an aggravating factor
• “[McNeil] strongly suggests that the rights under Miranda and Edwards do not extend to permit anticipatory requests for counsel to preclude waiver at the time interrogation begins”
• “[McNeil] strongly suggests that the rights under Miranda and Edwards do not extend to permit anticipatory requests for counsel to preclude waiver at the time interrogation begins”
• “[ McNeil ] strongly suggests that the rights under Miranda and Edwards do not extend to permit anticipatory requests for counsel to preclude waiver at the time interrogation begins”
• McNeil \strongly suggests that the rights under Miranda and Edwards do not extend to permit anticipatory requests for counsel to preclude waiver at the time interrogation begins\; assertion of right when not being questioned ineffective even if in custody

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).