State Ex Rel. Juvenile Department v. Loredo

How courts have described this case

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

• distinguishing Killitz, and holding that student not in custody because officer informed the child that he was not under arrest, could leave at any time, and did not have to answer any questions
• constructing test “whether a reasonable person in child's position — that is, a child of similar age, knowledge and experience, placed in a similar environment — would have felt required to stay and answer all of [the officer’s] questions”
• distinguishing Killitz, and holding that student not in custody because officer informed the child that he was not under arrest, could leave at any time, and did not have to answer any questions
• distinguishing Killitz, and holding that student not in custody because officer informed the child that he was not under arrest, could leave at any time, and did not have to answer any questions
• distinguishing Killitz, and holding that student not in custody because officer informed the child that he was not under arrest, could leave at any time, and did not have to answer any questions
• custodial question entailed inquiry into what a reasonable person of the child’s age, knowledge and experience would have thought

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).