United States v. William Bradley Kargoe
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. William Bradley KARGOE, Appellant
Opinion
PER CURIAM:
The factual determination of the district judge made at the trial when he admitted defendant’s statements in evidence against him that the statements were freely and voluntarily made in full knowledge of defendant’s rights under Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), and Escobedo v. State of Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 , 84 S.Ct. 1758 , 12 L.Ed.2d 977 (1964), was not clearly erroneous. We affirm the conviction and judgment entered thereon.
Affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 4 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.