TIDELAND WELDING SERVICE ET AL.

v.

SAWYER ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Withrow v. Williams, 507 U.S. 680 (U.S. 1993)
  …runk driver questioned at accident scene before arrest; not in custody), cert. denied, 498 U. S. 1014 (1990). See, e.g., Endress v. Dugger, 880 F. 2d 1244, 1246-1250 (CA11 1989) (defendant volunteered information without questioning), cert. denied, 495 U. S. 904 (1990); United States ex rel. Church v. De Robertis, 771 F. 2d 1015, 1018-1020 (CA7 1985) (placing defendant’s brother in cell with him not interrogation); Harryman v. Estelle, 616 F. 2d 870, 873-875 (CA5) (en banc) (officer’s surprised exclamation,…
• Jacobs v. Singletary, 952 F.2d 1282 (11th Cir. 1992)
  …ould know [is] reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response from the suspect.” Rhode Island v. Innis, 446 U.S. 291, 301, 100 S.Ct. 1682, 1689, 64 L.Ed.2d 297 (1979); see Endress v. Dugger, 880 F. 2d 1244, 1249 (11th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 495 U.S. 904, 110 S.Ct. 1923, 109 L.Ed.2d 287 (1990). Detective Hill’s conceded purpose in questioning Jacobs was essentially to “ ‘open up a more generalized discussion relating directly or indirectly to the investigation.’ ” Christopher, 824 F. 2d at 845 (qu…
• United States v. Adams, 1 F.3d 1566 (11th Cir. 1993)
  …were not required. Miranda “warnings are required before any statement may be admitted into evidence at trial which was elicited from a person in custody through interrogation.” Endress v. Dugger, 880 F. 2d 1244, 1248 (11th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 495 U.S. 904, 110 S.Ct. 1923, 109 L.Ed.2d 287 (1990). “Since the warnings are required only in the situation of a custodial interrogation, many courts have addressed the issues of when a person is in ‘custody’ or has been ‘interrogated’ for the purposes of Miran…