Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether the trial court properly denied defendant’s motion to suppress his statements?    

Where defendant moved to suppress statements made to law enforcement during an in home interrogation, the denial of the motion is affirmed because the defendant was not in custody when he made the statements, and therefore the officers did not need to advise him of his Miranda rights, and, his statements were voluntary.  Affirmed.

United States v. Sandell, 21-1511, Grasz, J.  Appealed from United States District Court, Southern District of Iowa.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

By |2022-04-19T04:24:14+00:00April 19th, 2022|Victories/Case Law Updates|0 Comments

About the Author:

Leave A Comment