State v. Moeller

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that questions during a detainee’s medical condition while in police custody served an administrative purpose and did not constitute interrogation
• “Among the questions normally attendant to arrest and custody — not requiring Miranda warnings — are ‘routine booking questions.’ ”
• “Questions normally attendant to arrest and cus- tody, even if reasonably likely to elicit incriminating infor- mation, are not subject to the requirement to give Miranda warnings so long as they are not intended or designed to elicit such information.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Montiel-Delvalle
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2020-06-17· cited 5×
• State v. Yaeger
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2021-05-26· cited 2×
• State v. Delgado-Rodriguez
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2026-04-22· cited 2×
• State v. Cartier
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2026-04-22· cited 1×
• Michael Jurell Jones v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 2017-03-22

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Miranda v. Arizona
  Supreme Court· 1966-06-13· cited 58,288×
• Rhode Island v. Innis
  Supreme Court· 1980-05-12· cited 5,571×
• Pennsylvania v. Muniz
  Supreme Court· 1990-06-18· cited 976×
• State v. Shaff
  Oregon Supreme Court· 2007-12-28· cited 66×
• State v. Cunningham
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2002-02-13· cited 20×
• State v. Rodriguez
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1978-12-04· cited 18×
• State v. Whitlow
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1973-06-18· cited 16×
• State v. Cobb
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1975-09-10· cited 8×
• State v. Hlady
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1979-12-31· cited 8×
• State v. Brummer
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2004-12-08· cited 2×