Valerie Renda v. Paul King David B. Kelsey Paul King, in Docket No. 01-2421 Valerie Renda, in Docket No. 01-2498

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an abuse of discretion standard applies to evidentiary rulings involving applications of the Federal Rules of Evidence
• recognizing that Chavez “leaves open the issue of when a statement is used at a criminal proceeding”
• emphasizing that the coerced statements must be used “during a criminal trial, and not in obtaining an indictment”
• emphasizing that the coerced statements must be used “during a criminal trial, and not in obtaining an indictment” or otherwise bringing charges to implicate the Constitution
• finding that a custodial interrogation not preceded by Miranda warnings did not violate arrestee’s Fifth Amendment right against self- incrimination because her statements were not used at trial
• noting that the Supreme Court’s decision in Chavez v. Martinez, 538 U.S. 760 (2003) reaffirmed the Third Circuit’s holding in Giuffre v. Bissell, 31 F.3d 1241 (3d Cir. 1994) to the same effect

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).