United States v. Charles Palmer

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that New York and New Jersey's anti-discrimination laws do not apply to the Port Authority
• commenting that the co-conspirators \conspired to rob the stores to feed their habits. They did not follow normal patterns of behavior\
• observing that, “[i]n the context of the voluntariness of a confession, a defendant’s mental state by itself and apart from its relation to official coercion never disposes of the inquiry”
• observing that sixteen prior arrests constituted competent evidence of adequate comprehension
• rejecting the claim that an instruction to cure improper remarks in summation “was insufficient because it did not immediately follow the misconduct” but was “delivered several minutes after the objection,” when the instruction “pointedly addressed [counsel’s] improper remark”
• “To determine the voluntariness of a waiver [of Miranda rights], it is necessary to look at the totality of the circumstances . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).