Orzoco v. Texas
Significance, A Significant Reversal, Impact
Reyes Arias Orozco
State of Texas
That incriminating statements made to police were inadmissible at his murder trial because the police did not give Miranda warnings.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Charles W. Tessmer
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Lonny F. Zwiener, Assistant Attorney General of Texas
Justices for the Court
Hugo Lafayette Black, (writing for the Court), William J. Brennan, Jr., William O. Douglas, John Marshall Harlan II, Thurgood Marshall, Earl Warren
Potter Stewart, Byron R. White, (Abe Fortas did not participate)
Date of Decision
25 March 1969
Reversed the state courts' ruling that petitioner's incriminating statements to police were admissible at the murder trial despite the lack of Miranda warnings, and reversed petitioner's conviction.
- Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).
- Beckwith v. United States, 425 U.S. 341 (1976).
- New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. 649 (1984).
- Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420 (1984).
- Oregon v. Elstad, 470 U.S. 298 (1985).
- Cassell, Paul G. and Bret S. Hayman. "Police Interrogation in the 1990s: An Empirical Study of the Effects of Miranda." UCLA Law Review, Vol. 42, 1996, p. 839.
- Faulkner, Jane M. "So You Kinda, Sorta, Think You Might Need a Lawyer?: Ambiguous Requests For Counsel After Davis v. United States." Arkansas Law Review, Vol. 49, no. 2, 1996.
- Pointer v. Texas - Significance, Supreme Court Holds That States Must Allow Criminal Defendants To Confront And Cross-examine Witnesses Against Them
- Oregon v. Mitchell - Significance
- Orzoco v. Texas - Significance
- Orzoco v. Texas - A Significant Reversal
- Orzoco v. Texas - Impact
- Other Free Encyclopedias