An Entity of Type: unit of work, from Named Graph: http://dbpedia.org, within Data Space: dbpedia.org

Stansbury v. California, 511 U.S. 318 (1994), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court considered whether a police officer's subjective and undisclosed opinion whether a person who had been questioned was a suspect was relevant in determining whether that person had been in custody and thus entitled to the Miranda warnings. In a 9–0 ruling, the Court reversed and remanded the case. In a per curiam decision, the Court held that "an officer's subjective and undisclosed view concerning whether the person being interrogated is a suspect is irrelevant to the assessment [of] whether the person is in custody."

Property Value
dbo:abstract
  • Stansbury v. California, 511 U.S. 318 (1994), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court considered whether a police officer's subjective and undisclosed opinion whether a person who had been questioned was a suspect was relevant in determining whether that person had been in custody and thus entitled to the Miranda warnings. In a 9–0 ruling, the Court reversed and remanded the case. In a per curiam decision, the Court held that "an officer's subjective and undisclosed view concerning whether the person being interrogated is a suspect is irrelevant to the assessment [of] whether the person is in custody." (en)
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
dbo:wikiPageID
  • 43446247 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageLength
  • 2649 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
  • 1064935512 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbp:arguedate
  • 0001-03-30 (xsd:gMonthDay)
dbp:argueyear
  • 1994 (xsd:integer)
dbp:case
  • Stansbury v. California, (en)
dbp:concurrence
  • Blackmun (en)
dbp:cornell
dbp:decidedate
  • 0001-04-26 (xsd:gMonthDay)
dbp:decideyear
  • 1994 (xsd:integer)
dbp:fullname
  • Robert Edward Stansbury v. California (en)
dbp:holding
  • The test for custody under Miranda v. Arizona is whether there was a formal arrest or restraint on freedom of movement of the degree associated with a formal arrest. The subjective views harbored by either the interrogating officers or the person being questioned are irrelevant. The key inquiry should be whether the individual had been placed under formal arrest, or whether the restraint placed on the individual's freedom of movement rose to the level of a formal arrest. (en)
dbp:justia
dbp:lawsapplied
dbp:litigants
  • Robert Edward Stansbury v. California (en)
dbp:loc
dbp:oralargument
dbp:oyez
dbp:parallelcitations
  • 172800.0
dbp:percuriam
  • yes (en)
dbp:prior
  • Defendant convicted; Calif. Sup. Ct. affirms (en)
dbp:subsequent
  • Case remanded to trial court. (en)
dbp:uspage
  • 318 (xsd:integer)
dbp:usvol
  • 511 (xsd:integer)
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dcterms:subject
rdf:type
rdfs:comment
  • Stansbury v. California, 511 U.S. 318 (1994), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court considered whether a police officer's subjective and undisclosed opinion whether a person who had been questioned was a suspect was relevant in determining whether that person had been in custody and thus entitled to the Miranda warnings. In a 9–0 ruling, the Court reversed and remanded the case. In a per curiam decision, the Court held that "an officer's subjective and undisclosed view concerning whether the person being interrogated is a suspect is irrelevant to the assessment [of] whether the person is in custody." (en)
rdfs:label
  • Stansbury v. California (en)
owl:sameAs
prov:wasDerivedFrom
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
foaf:name
  • (en)
  • Robert Edward Stansbury v. California (en)
is dbo:wikiPageDisambiguates of
is dbo:wikiPageRedirects of
is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink of
is foaf:primaryTopic of
Powered by OpenLink Virtuoso    This material is Open Knowledge     W3C Semantic Web Technology     This material is Open Knowledge    Valid XHTML + RDFa
This content was extracted from Wikipedia and is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License