Skip to main content

Vines v. State

Citations

  • 402 A.2d 900
  • 285 Md. 369
  • 1979 Md. LEXIS 239

How courts have described this case

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

  • observing that “in order to be subject to the Miranda warnings, statements must flow from a ‘custodial interrogation’ within the meaning of Miranda ”
  • noting that statements obtained from a defendant not advised of Miranda warnings must be excluded from evidence if the statements flow from a custodial interrogation within the meaning of Miranda
  • noting that statements obtained from a defendant not advised of Miranda warnings must be excluded from evidence if the statements flow from a custodial interrogation within the meaning of Miranda
  • displaying seized contraband and presenting copy of search warrant listing seized inventory did not constitute “interrogation”
  • “Miranda impressed procedural safeguards on the traditional test of voluntariness by way of warnings to be given.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Murphy, Smith, Digges, Eldridge, Orth, Cole

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

21 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

37 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.