Appellant's motion to suppress his statements was properly denied. The record supports the court's detailed factual findings. Appellant's initial statement to the police did not require Miranda warnings because at the time of the statement a reasonable person similarly situated to appellant, and innocent of any crime, would not have believed that his freedom was significantly restricted (see People v Yukl,
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
