| No. 84-509 |
N.H. |
1985-08-16 |
—
|
State v. Cormier
|
|
… ut more, amount to compelled self-incrimination. If it did, the requirements of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), could not in principle be confined to interrogations, and any statement following State intrusion would be inadmissible …
|
| No. 83-479 |
N.H. |
1985-08-15 |
—
|
State v. Sprague
|
|
… endant was taken to a small interrogation room at the rear of the building. His Miranda rights were read to him, and he then gave an oral account of his activities at the time of the burglaries. The officer asked him to write out and sign a …
|
| No. 83-402 |
N.H. |
1985-05-28 |
—
|
State v. Cimino
|
|
… ndant for driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor and gave him Miranda warnings. At the moment of arrest the door of the defendant’s car was open and its motor was still running. Before leaving for the police station the de …
|
| No. 83-334 |
N.H. |
1985-05-24 |
—
|
State v. Cote
|
|
… g eight pounds. The police seized the bags, arrested the defendant and gave him Miranda warnings. They then took the defendant upstairs, where he dropped a plastic bag containing packets of white powder, which was found to be cocaine. In th …
|
| No. 83-220 |
N.H. |
1985-04-19 |
—
|
State v. Brodeur
|
|
… estified that on the way to the police station he informed the defendant of his Miranda rights but did not question him. At the police station, the defendant was readvised of his Miranda rights regarding questioning by the police and of the …
|
| No. 84-095 |
N.H. |
1985-03-07 |
—
|
State v. Pinder
|
|
… defendant in front of his house. They then arrested him and advised him of his Miranda rights. Following his arrest, the defendant agreed to sign a standard consent search form. The form stated that the defendant had been informed of his c …
|
| No. 84-129 |
N.H. |
1985-03-01 |
—
|
State v. Munson
|
|
… ain silent and the right to counsel before engaging in custodial interrogation. Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 444 (1966). If the suspect asserts these rights, all questioning must cease. Id. at 444-45 . The suspect’s silence “in the fac …
|
| No. 83-526 |
N.H. |
1985-02-21 |
—
|
State v. Nadeau
|
|
… ice. At the Canaan police station, the defendant, who is illiterate, was read a Miranda rights waiver form. He told police that he understood his rights and then signed the waiver form in the presence of a literate friend, who signed as a w …
|
| No. 83-027 |
N.H. |
1985-02-06 |
—
|
State v. Benoit
|
|
… for adults. See State v. Nash, 119 N.H. 728, 730-31 , 407 A.2d 365, 367 (1979); Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 444-45 (1966). The officer testified that he made no attempt to explain any of the rights, but *10 merely asked the child if h …
|
| No. 84-047 |
N.H. |
1984-10-26 |
—
|
State v. Barry
|
|
… d injuries. At the hospital, the arresting officer twice read the defendant his Miranda rights and also explained his right under RSA 265:92 to withhold his consent to a blood alcohol test. The defendant failed to respond. He claims that al …
|
| No. 83-211 |
N.H. |
1984-09-27 |
—
|
State v. Jones
|
|
… n the bombing. When they reached the Nashua police station, the police read the Miranda warnings to the defendant. He said that he understood them and signed a waiver of his rights under them. Immediately he began to talk about the subject …
|
| No. 83-240 |
N.H. |
1984-09-27 |
—
|
State v. Lamb
|
|
… on the issue of the voluntariness of an oral or written waiver of a defendant’s Miranda rights, is hereafter required to enter an express finding that the waiver (and any confession) was voluntary beyond a reasonable doubt.” The trial judge …
|
| No. 28-399 |
N.H. |
1984-08-09 |
—
|
State v. Portigue
|
|
… tigue in the waiting room of the hospital emergency area and advised him of his Miranda rights. See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). Rodney at first told Sergeant Cook that Amy had been sick. In response, Sergeant Cook told Rodney t …
|
| No. 83-126 |
N.H. |
1984-08-09 |
—
|
State v. Portigue
|
|
… cy area, he was approached by Rochester Police Sergeant Cook and advised of his Miranda rights. Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). Since Officer Cook was not in possession of a so-called Miranda form at the time of the interview, a wr …
|
| No. 82-389; No. 82-551 |
N.H. |
1984-05-04 |
—
|
State v. Elbert
|
|
… ividual.” On leaving the restaurant, he therefore orally gave the defendant the Miranda warnings. See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). After each separate warning, Captain Barry asked if the defendant understood the right, and to ea …
|
| No. 82-504 |
N.H. |
1984-04-13 |
—
|
State v. Damiano
|
|
… t. I, art. 15; State v. Nash, 119 N.H. 728, 730 , 407 A.2d 365, 367 (1979); see Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 469 (1966). However, these procedural protections attach only after an individual has been taken into custody. See State v. Ta …
|
| No. 82-059 |
N.H. |
1984-02-03 |
—
|
State v. Reynolds
|
|
… .Dalianis, J.) denied those motions, finding that the defendant’s waiver of his Miranda rights was voluntary beyond a reasonable doubt. The statements and the physical evidence were admitted into evidence at the trial. The defendant appeals …
|
| No. 82-174 |
N.H. |
1983-12-30 |
—
|
State v. Sweeney
|
|
… ant, and before he was placed under arrest, Detective Hamel informed him of his Miranda rights, see Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), and asked if he understood them, to which defendant replied, “Is this for the package that was just …
|
| No. 82-196 |
N.H. |
1983-12-29 |
—
|
State v. Scarborough
|
|
… ant’s confession, the Winchester police wisely informed him of his rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). They also attempted to contact Attorney Kennedy at his office, but were told that he was then in the Jaffrey District C …
|
| No. 82-121 |
N.H. |
1983-12-29 |
—
|
State v. Baillargeon
|
|
… sent during the test, and that the defendant would have to sign a waiver of his Miranda rights before the test began. See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). The attorney was not informed that a second trooper would be monitoring the t …
|
| No. 82-476 |
N.H. |
1983-12-27 |
—
|
State v. Tapply
|
|
… asserted his right to counsel after having been given the warnings required by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), at *322 the start of the questioning. In this court, however, the inquiry was expanded to consider other alleged ground …
|
| No. 82-584 |
N.H. |
1983-12-27 |
—
|
State v. Palamia
|
|
… that had occurred in Hudson in December 1980. The defendant was advised of his Miranda rights, after which he reviewed and executed a waiver of rights form. He then made and signed the confession which is the subject of his motion to suppr …
|
| No. 82-202 |
N.H. |
1983-10-26 |
—
|
State v. Copeland
|
|
… icer, a trooper in the New Hampshire State Police, advised the defendant of his Miranda rights both before and after he was transported to the Nashua Police Station. See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). The defendant initially refus …
|
| 82-467 |
N.H. |
1983-08-31 |
—
|
State v. Berube
|
|
… ts burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that he had been informed of his Miranda rights before undergoing custodial interrogation, and therefore that incriminating statements made by him *773 were improperly admitted into evidence at …
|
| 82-164 |
N.H. |
1983-07-13 |
—
|
State v. Zysk
|
|
… olice station. When he arrived at the station, the defendant was advised of his Miranda rights, see Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 478-79 (1966), and then confessed to the AAmco burglary. The defendant’s statement was recorded and typed, …
|
| 81-395 |
N.H. |
1983-03-28 |
—
|
State v. Holler
|
|
… appeared highly intoxicated. The arresting officer advised the defendant of his Miranda rights and took him directly to the Raymond police station. During the ride to the station, the defendant voluntarily told the officer that he had shot …
|
| No. 82-137 |
N.H. |
1983-03-24 |
—
|
State v. Beaupre
|
|
… ive James Brackett of the Nashua Police Department advised the defendant of his Miranda rights. The defendant stated that he understood his rights and refused to sign a form waiving those rights. When asked if he wanted to make a statement …
|
| 82-093 |
N.H. |
1983-01-24 |
—
|
State v. Levesque
|
|
… 4 resisting arrest and then driven to the police station where he was given his Miranda warnings, and he elected to remain silent. During the booking process, the Concord police learned that the defendant’s name was John Levesque, not Wayne …
|
| 81-429 |
N.H. |
1983-01-24 |
—
|
State v. Chaisson
|
|
… g and was arrested. At the time of his arrest, the defendant was advised of his Miranda rights and taken to the Keene Police Station. There he was again advised of his rights and admitted that he understood them. The defendant offered to gi …
|
| 82-062 |
N.H. |
1982-12-30 |
—
|
State v. Birmingham
|
|
… the arrest legal and that the defendant had voluntarily waived his rights after Miranda warnings. After his conviction, the defendant appealed. The sole issue argued in this court is the validity of the defendant’s arrest. The events are no …
|
| 82-098 |
N.H. |
1982-12-08 |
—
|
State v. Bushey
|
|
… bt that the defendant, Warren W. Bushey, knowingly and intelligently waived his Miranda rights before making a statement to the police. Holding that the State failed to meet its burden, we reverse his conviction and remand for a new trial. …
|
| 81-091 |
N.H. |
1982-05-21 |
—
|
State v. Goddard
|
|
… . Before interviewing the defendant, the police officers gave the defendant his Miranda rights. See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 478-79 (1966). The defendant refused to answer any questions. A short time later, however, the defendant c …
|
| 80-475 |
N.H. |
1982-03-10 |
—
|
State v. Radziewicz
|
|
… the influence, RSA 262-A:62 (Supp. 1979), searched for weapons, advised of his Miranda rights, and transported to the Keene police station by Chief Southwell. Upon his arrival at the Keene police station, the defendant’s Miranda rights wer …
|
| 80-485 |
N.H. |
1981-11-16 |
—
|
Appeal of Parker
|
|
… . See generally State v. Gullick, 118 N.H. 912 , 396 A.2d 554 (1978) (waiver of Miranda rights must be voluntary beyond a reasonable doubt). Affirmed. Batchelder, J., did not sit; the others concurred. …
|
| 79-330 |
N.H. |
1981-01-21 |
—
|
State v. Lemire
|
|
… two men out of the vehicle. At this point, Lynch informed the two men of their Miranda rights and conducted a pat-down search for weapons. David Rist, a juvenile officer who was present, took the juvenile into custody. Sergeant Lynch drove …
|
| 79-276 |
N.H. |
1980-06-25 |
—
|
State v. Sorrell
|
|
… phone call had originated from that residence, and advised the defendant of his Miranda rights. The defendant then agreed to answer their questions and admitted that he had been in the house during the time that the call had been received. …
|
| 79-216 |
N.H. |
1980-01-24 |
—
|
State v. Wayne Kelley
|
|
… wed to impeach the defendant with a statement obtained from him in violation of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). Harris v. New York, 401 U.S. 222 (1971); cf. Mincey v. Arizona, 437 U.S. 385 (1979). Although defendant in this situati …
|
| 79-052 |
N.H. |
1979-10-12 |
—
|
State v. Nash
|
|
… own to be voluntary, but also that the subsidiary procedural rights outlined in Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), be followed. He also argues that the sixth amendment right to counsel attaches at a post-indictment interrogation and i …
|
| 78-200 |
N.H. |
1979-08-17 |
—
|
State v. White
|
|
… police officer. After arriving at the station, Officer Perry gave the defendant Miranda warnings and proceeded to interrogate him. Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). He elicited the defendant’s oral and written confessions and then ar …
|
| 78-233 |
N.H. |
1979-07-11 |
—
|
State v. Noel
|
|
… cifically, the defendant argues that any statements made after he was given the Miranda warnings were inadmissible because he was mentally unable to understand his rights and incapable of giving a knowing, intelligent, voluntary waiver. The …
|
| 78-136 |
N.H. |
1979-05-31 |
—
|
State v. Osborne
|
|
… , on the table in the living room. Lt. Wilson then advised the defendant of his Miranda rights because of the seriousness of the offense he was investigating. Mr. Osborne asked if he was under arrest. Lt. Wilson *431 replied that he was not …
|
| 78-160 |
N.H. |
1978-12-29 |
—
|
State v. Gullick
|
|
… that military office was also present. Detective Conner read the defendant his Miranda rights from the police department’s waiver-of-rights form that stated: PORTSMOUTH N.H. POLICE DEPARTMENT WAIVER OF RIGHTS [This portion is to be read an …
|
| 7950 |
N.H. |
1978-04-25 |
—
|
Reeves v. Cox
|
|
… ers. The plaintiff claims that these statements should have been excluded under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). Miranda has been held not to apply to habeas corpus hearings which are incident to extradition proceedings. United Stat …
|
| 7721 |
N.H. |
1977-10-31 |
—
|
State v. Butler
|
|
… Pie was asked to drive to the police station and he complied. Pie was given the Miranda warnings by the chief of police. It is not clear that he expressly waived his rights at that time. See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). As we wi …
|
| No. 7563 |
N.H. |
1977-01-31 |
—
|
State v. Smith
|
|
… fendant further argues that he should be acquitted because he was not given the Miranda warnings, Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), until after he had been taken to the police station. He argues that he was deprived of his liberty wh …
|
| No. 7487 |
N.H. |
1976-12-30 |
—
|
State v. Seeley
|
|
… hat his motion for mistrial should have been granted when his silence after the Miranda warnings was shown in evidence, that the court erred in allowing certain evidence to be introduced and in its failure to charge as requested. Defendant’ …
|
| 6783 |
N.H. |
1976-12-17 |
—
|
State v. Breest
|
|
… receive the warnings required by Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 (1964) and Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). The State admits that the defendant was a suspect in the murder of Susan Randall when he was interviewed and should hav …
|
| 7429 |
N.H. |
1976-10-29 |
—
|
State v. Floyd
|
|
… nt’s home. They took the three to the police station, the defendant was given a Miranda warning, signed a rights card, and then talked voluntarily to an officer. He made conflicting statements as to his whereabouts the night of March 6-7. I …
|
| 7280 |
N.H. |
1976-07-30 |
—
|
State v. Slade
|
|
… aken to the side of the trailer where he was frisked, handcuffed, and given the Miranda warnings. After the arrest, Captain Seddon of the Hudson police entered defendant’s trailer. Upon entering, he observed numerous handguns and rifles, an …
|
| 7306 |
N.H. |
1976-02-27 |
—
|
State v. Ballentine
|
|
… hearing following which the court found it to have been voluntary and that all Miranda warnings had been given. That part of the Hoyt out-of-court statement which implicated the defendant in other crimes was not properly admitted as a prio …
|