HOLT ET AL.

v.

OKLAHOMA

Citator

Cited By (15 total)

• Kirksey v. State, 433 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)
  …ided on other grounds, but in dicta, espoused effective compliance); United States v. Robinson, 325 F. 2d 391 (2d Cir.1963) (substantial compliance test, eschewing a “ritualistic” approach); Holt v. State, 357 P. 2d 574 (Okl.Cr. 1961), cert. denied, 366 U.S. 716, 81 S.Ct. 1659, 6 L.Ed.2d 846 (1961) (mere failure of a peace officer to expressly inform of cause of arrest will not render arrest illegal where person arrested knew officer and knew he was acting in official capacity); People v. Maddox, 46 Cal.2d…
• Conti v. State, 540 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
  …il subsequent thereto does not necessarily deprive him of his rights); United States v. Robinson, 325 F. 2d 391 (2d Cir.1963) (substantial compliance test, eschewing a “ritualistic” approach); Holt v. State, 357 P. 2d 574 (Okl.Cr.1960), cert. denied 366 U.S. 716, 81 S.Ct. 1659, 6 L.Ed.2d 846 (1961) (mere failure of an officer to expressly inform of cause of arrest will not render arrest illegal where a person arrested knew officer and knew he was acting in official capacity); People v. Maddox, 46 Cal.2d 301…
• United States v. Bishop, 412 U.S. 346 (U.S. 1973)
  …Abdul v. United States, 254 F. 2d 292 (CA9 1958) (§§ 2707 (b) and (c) of the 1939 Code and §§ 7202 and 7203 of the 1954 Code). See also Janko v. United States, 281 F. 2d 156, 166-167 (CA8 1960), rev’d on confession of error by the Solicitor General, 366 U. S. 716 (1961) (§§ 7201 and 7207); Lumetta v. United States, 362 F. 2d 644, 646 n. 3 (CA8 1966) (§§ 7201 and [*349] 7203); Escobar v. United States, 388 F. 2d 661 (CA5 1967), cert. denied, 390 U. S. 1024 (1968) (§§ 7206 (1) and 7207). Other inconsistencies…