Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Fare Vs. Michael C.

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jul 28, 1978

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

28 entries 2 linked 26 unlinked
Show
  1. Oregon Vs. Hass US Supreme Court · Mar 19, 1975
  2. Oregon Vs. Mathiason US Supreme Court · Jan 25, 1977
  3. Fare v. Michael
    Search
  4. C. - 439 U.S. 1310 (1978) U.S. Supreme Court Fare v. Michael
    Search
  5. C., 439 U.S. 1310 (1978) Fare v. Michael
    Search
  6. s presence and relied on by the trial court in finding respondent guilty of murder was inadmissible under Miranda v. Arizona
    Search
  7. Supreme Court reversed, holding that a confession relied on by the Superior Court was inadmissible under Miranda v. Arizona
    Search
  8. to determine the implications of Miranda, and did not purport to construe the State Constitution. See People v. Burton
    Search
  9. People v. Randall
    Search
  10. to raise serious if not insuperable difficulties under both California law and the Double Jeopardy Clause. See Miranda v. Arizona
    Search
  11. People v. Burton
    Search
  12. Miranda issues that, I think, portends a substantial likelihood of success for the instant petition. Miranda v. Arizona
    Search
  13. reluctance is shown by our decisions reviewing state court interpretations of Miranda. As we noted in Oregon v. Hass
    Search
  14. Emphasis in original.) In Michigan v. Tucker
    Search
  15. U. S. 1315 be excluded at the subsequent state criminal trial. We overruled a State Supreme Court in Oregon v. Hass
    Search
  16. warning if, some hours earlier, the defendant had indicated he did not want to discuss a different charge. Michigan v. Mosley
    Search
  17. S. 96 (1975). These are not to suggest that refusals to extend Miranda always please prosecutors, see Brown v. Illinois
    Search
  18. U. S. 590 (1975), or that this Court has shunned all logical developments of that opinion, see Doyle v. Ohio
    Search
  19. read Miranda too broadly. Oregon v. Mathiason
    Search
  20. Beckwith v. United
    Search
  21. U.S. Supreme Court Fare v. Michael
    Search
  22. Miranda v. Arizona
    Search
  23. the State Constitution. See People v. Burton
    Search
  24. and the Double Jeopardy Clause. See Miranda v. Arizona
    Search
  25. In Michigan v. Tucker
    Search
  26. Michigan v. Mosley
    Search
  27. Brown v. Illinois
    Search
  28. Doyle v. Ohio
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial