State v. Linnen

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that even though interrogating officers encouraged defendant to make a statement, their actions were not coercive or threatening
• statements were given freely and voluntarily where interrogating officers were not coercive or threatening and statements were not procured by improper influence
• statements were given freely and voluntarily, and were therefore admissible, even though interrogating officers encouraged the statements, where officers were not coercive or threatening and statements were not procured by improper influence
• state-ments were given freely and voluntarily, and were therefore admissible, even though interrogating officers encouraged the statements, where officers were not coercive or threatening and statements were not procured by improper influence
• accused did not invoke his Fifth Amendment right to counsel where he was not reluctant to answer questions after receiving Miranda warnings, even though he had applied for appointed counsel and stated he intended to obtain his own attorney

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).