State v. Chrisicos

How courts have described this case

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

• statements made in response to routine booking questions not subject to Miranda rights under Article 15
• “Statements made in response to routine booking questions need not be suppressed even if the defendant did not first waive his or her Miranda rights.”
• statements made in response to routine booking questions are not Miranda violative

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Plch
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 2003-06-30· cited 20×
• State v. Rheaume
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 2004-04-09· cited 17×
• State of New Hampshire v. David Pyles
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 2014-04-04· cited 3×

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Miranda v. Arizona
  Supreme Court· 1966-06-13· cited 58,288×
• Pennsylvania v. Muniz
  Supreme Court· 1990-06-18· cited 976×
• State v. Ball
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 1983-12-12· cited 762×
• Commonwealth v. Woods
  Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1995-01-24· cited 118×
• State v. Gullick
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 1978-12-29· cited 25×
• State v. Plante
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 1990-07-18· cited 14×
• State v. Jaroma
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 1993-04-28· cited 12×
• State v. Duffy
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 2001-07-23· cited 11×
• State v. Jeleniewski
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 2002-02-25· cited 9×