J. D. B. was a thirteen-year-old middle school student who was pulled out of class by a uniformed police officer, and interrogated by a police investigator at school.
Q. What did the JDBV North Carolina 2011 Supreme Court ruling decide?
North Carolina, 564 U.S. 261 (2011), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that age and mental status is relevant when determining police custody for Miranda purposes, overturning its prior ruling from seven years before.
Table of Contents
- Q. What did the JDBV North Carolina 2011 Supreme Court ruling decide?
- Q. What factors should be considered in determining whether a person is in custody?
- Q. Who won JDB vs North Carolina?
- Q. Why was JDB tried in a North Carolina court instead of a federal district court?
- Q. What type of room was JDB interrogated in?
- Q. What test is used by the courts to determine a custodial interrogation?
- Q. What factors do courts consider in evaluating whether a confession has been coerced?
- Q. How did the Miranda rule change law enforcement?
Q. What factors should be considered in determining whether a person is in custody?
In determining whether a reasonable person would consider himself to be “in custody,” a court should consider four factors, which include: “(1) the manner in which police summon the suspect for questioning; (2) the purpose, place, and manner of the interrogation; (3) the extent to which the suspect is confronted with …
Q. Who won JDB vs North Carolina?
Justice Sonia Sotomayor
Q. Why was JDB tried in a North Carolina court instead of a federal district court?
The court adjudicated him delinquent, finding that J.D.B had violated criminal laws. Both appellate courts agreed with the trial court. The North Carolina Supreme Court held that the test for custody did not include consideration of the age of an individual subjected to questioning by police.
Q. What type of room was JDB interrogated in?
A uniformed police officer on detail to the school took J. D. B. from his classroom to a closed-door conference room, where police and school administrators questioned him for at least 30 minutes.
Q. What test is used by the courts to determine a custodial interrogation?
42 Similar to the United States Supreme Court’s standard, the basic principle of Maine’s test is that “an interrogation is custodial if ‘a reasonable person standing in the shoes of [the defendant] would have felt he or she was not at liberty to terminate the interrogation and leave.
Q. What factors do courts consider in evaluating whether a confession has been coerced?
Whether a confession is involuntary must be determined by considering the totality of the circumstances – the characteristics of the defendant and the environment and technique of interrogation. Under the “totality of the circumstances” approach, virtually everything is relevant and nothing is determinative.
Q. How did the Miranda rule change law enforcement?
The Miranda rule, which the Supreme Court recognized as a constitutional right in its 1966 decision Miranda v. Arizona, requires that suspects be informed of their Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights “prior to interrogation” if their statements are to be used against them in court.
