Skip to main content
· 2/5/1987

State v. Kunkel

Citations

  • 404 N.W.2d 69
  • 137 Wis. 2d 172
  • 1987 Wisc. App. LEXIS 3468

How courts have described this case

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

  • applying the rescue doctrine to admit the defendant’s statements relating to the whereabouts of his missing daughter
  • defendant's statement that he could not afford counsel amounted to invocation of his right to counsel
  • defendant's statement that he could not afford counsel amounted to invocation of his right to counsel
  • police not prohibited from using privileged disclosures as source for discovery of other evidence; only when the communications themselves are sought to be admitted into evidence in a judicial proceeding does the rule of exclusion apply
  • police not prohibited from using privileged disclosures as source for discovery of other evidence; only when the communications themselves are sought to be admitted into evidence in a judicial proceeding does the rule of exclusion apply
  • permitting questions to suspect about a missing child

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Gartzke, P.J., Dykman, and Eich

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.