Citation network
Davis Vs. North Carolina
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 20, 1966
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Relied / Followed
-
Davis v. NorthSearch
-
Carolina - 384 U.S. 737 (1966) U.S. Supreme Court Davis v. NorthSearch
-
Carolina, 384 U.S. 737 (1966) Davis v. NorthSearch
-
inadmissible in evidence. Pp. 384 U. S. 739 -753. (a) Had this trial occurred after Miranda v. ArizonaSearch
-
U. S. 436 , the decision below would be reversed summarily. P. 384 U. S. 739 . (b) As Johnson v. NewSearch
-
of statements under the standards of voluntariness which had begun to evolve long prior to Miranda and Escobedo v. IllinoisSearch
-
in a coercive atmosphere, as here, has often resulted in a finding of involuntariness by this Court, e.g., Fikes v. AlabamaSearch
-
that was committed. Nor are we called upon to determine whether the confessions obtained are true or false. Rogers v. RichmondSearch
-
of the court below must be reversed. Had the trial in this case before us come after our decision in Miranda v. ArizonaSearch
-
confessed. Id. at 384 U. S. 476 , 384 U. S. 499 . We have also held today, in Johnson v. NewSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
the standards of voluntariness which had begun to evolve long prior to our decisions in Miranda and Escobedo v. IllinoisSearch
-
This Court has undertaken to review the voluntariness of statements obtained by police in state cases since Brown v. MississippiSearch
-
in federal prosecutions -- a standard grounded in the policies of the privilege against self-incrimination. Malloy v. HoganSearch
-
in several of our prior decisions Page 384 U. S. 741 dealing with standards of voluntariness. Haynes v. WashingtonSearch
-
U. S. 62 , 338 U. S. 64 (1949). See also Gallegos v. ColoradoSearch
-
Page 384 U. S. 742 and make an independent determination of the ultimate issue of voluntariness. E.g., Haynes v. WashingtonSearch
-
p. 7. We may readily agree that the record does not show any deliberate attempt to starve Davis, compare Payne v. ArkansasSearch
-
in such a coercive atmosphere has often resulted in a finding of involuntariness by this Court. E.g., Culombe v. ConnecticutSearch
-
the grain of our prior decisions. The Court first confesses that the rule adopted under the Fifth Amendment in Miranda v. ArizonaSearch
-
to counsel before custodial interrogation, is not retroactive, and therefore does not apply to this case. See Johnson v. NewSearch
-
and Turner v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Davis v. NorthSearch
-
Miranda v. ArizonaSearch
-
As Johnson v. NewSearch
-
Miranda and Escobedo v. IllinoisSearch
-
Johnson v. NewSearch
-
Brown v. MississippiSearch
-
Haynes v. WashingtonSearch
-
E.g., Haynes v. WashingtonSearch
-
Payne v. ArkansasSearch
-
Court. E.g., Culombe v. ConnecticutSearch
-
See Johnson v. NewSearch
-
Blackburn v. AlabamaSearch
-
Ashcraft v. TennesseeSearch
-
Rogers v. RichmondSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial