01-2148 State v. Morgan

By: dmc-admin//April 8, 2002//

Listen to this article

“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

Related Content

Termination of Parental Rights-Preservation of Key Objections

Julia appeals from circuit court orders terminating her parental rights to her children, Nathan and Neil.2 Jul[...]

April 22, 2024

Termination of Parental Rights

Ralph appeals from orders terminating his parental rights to his son, Neil, and to his daughter, Peggy.3 Ralph[...]

April 22, 2024

Involuntary Commitment

Caleb appeals an order for his involuntary commitment pursuant to WIS. STAT. § 51.20 and an order for his inv[...]

April 22, 2024

Sentence Modification

Romero M. Watson appeals from an order of the postconviction court denying his motion requesting sentence modi[...]

April 22, 2024

Contract

Aaron Carmody and Nicole Elizabeth Carmody, both pro se, appeal from the circuit court’s order, entered afte[...]

April 22, 2024

Right to Remain Silent-Plea Withdrawal

Higgins appeals from a judgment of conviction for one count of first-degree intentional homicide and one count[...]

April 22, 2024

Select Region or Brand

Upcoming Event