Township of North Bergen v. Borough of Teterboro

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 test is whether “a reasonable police officer in the circumstances would understand the statement to be a request for an attorney”
• “[T]he mere mention of the word ‘attorney’ or ‘lawyer’ without more, does not automatically invoke the right to counsel.” (citation and punctuation omitted)
• officer’s statement to defendant that he would arrest defendant’s wife if she lied about defendant’s whereabouts was a “mere truism” and did not render defendant’s subsequent confession involuntary
• “[O]ur case law contains no general mandate requiring trial courts, when responding to a jury’s request for a recharge on a particular issue, to also recharge on all principles asserted in connection with that issue.”
• “[O]ur case law contains no general mandate requiring trial courts, when responding to a jury’s request for a recharge on a particular issue, to also recharge on all principles asserted in connection with that issue.” (citation and punctuation omitted)
• no abuse of discretion where the trial court discerned that the jury was confused about a legal theory, the trial court correctly recharged the jury, and there was nothing indicating that the jury had an erroneous impression of the law after the recharge

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).