State v. Aynes

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 State’s initiation of an appeal from the denial of a motion to suppress “constitutes a ‘judicial admission’ that prosecution cannot proceed without the suppressed evidence”
• finding despite fact that defendant drove himself to police station for interrogation and left at end, interrogation was custodial in light of nature of interrogation and fact that defendant was never told he was free to leave
• finding despite fact that defendant drove himself to police station for interrogation and left at end, interrogation was custodial in light of nature of interrogation and fact that defendant was never told he was free to leave
• finding despite fact that defendant drove himself to police station for interrogation and left at end, interrogation was custodial in light of nature of interrogation and fact that defendant was never told he was free to leave
• “[B]y initiating an appeal from a motion to suppress evidence, the State necessarily represents to the trial and appellate courts that it cannot prosecute the defendant without the suppressed evidence.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).