agreeing with the district court that the language used by the officer to summon the defendant to the front seat of the patrol car was "not threatening or intimidating" and the defendant "was not handcuffed"
Summary of this case from State v. MajoukNo. 03-0619.
January 28, 2004.
Decisions Without Published Opinions Affirmed.
agreeing with the district court that the language used by the officer to summon the defendant to the front seat of the patrol car was "not threatening or intimidating" and the defendant "was not handcuffed"
Summary of this case from State v. MajoukIn State v. Plager, No. 03-0619, 2004 WL 144122, at *2-3 (Iowa Ct. App. Jan. 28, 2004), our court was asked to decide if the defendant was in police custody when he accompanied the officer back to his patrol car, sat in the front seat, and then proceeded to make incriminating statements.
Summary of this case from State v. PageIn Plager, the deputy asked the defendant to come back to his patrol car "to wait while he checked the validity of his driver's license."
Summary of this case from State v. O'DellFull title:State v. Plager
Court:Court of Appeals of Iowa
Date published: Jan 28, 2004
On the first factor, the court found "the language used to summon Mr. Majouk was not aggressive or…
State v. WilliamsBased on the totality of the circumstances, the reasonable person in Ewalt's position would not have believed…