Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility
Home / Case Digests / 01-2148 State v. Morgan

01-2148 State v. Morgan

“We conclude that Morgan was in custody when he was questioned by Officer Whyte, and therefore Miranda warnings were required to safeguard his privilege against self-incrimination. Because Morgan did not receive Miranda warnings prior to responding to Officer Whyte’s question, his statement in response must be suppressed.

Because it was not suppressed, we reverse and remand for a new trial.”

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

Dist IV, Dane County, Bartell, J., Vergeront, P.J.

Attorneys:

For Appellant: Timothy A. Provis, Madison

For Respondent: Francisco X. Vasquez, Madison; Jason J. Hanson, Madison


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*