Search results
Respondent Benjamin Quarles was charged in the New York trial court with criminal possession of a weapon. The trial court suppressed the gun in question, and a statement made by respondent, because the statement was obtained by police before they read respondent his " Miranda rights."
New York v. Quarles, 467 U.S. 649 (1984), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court regarding the public safety exception to the normal Fifth Amendment requirements of the Miranda warning.
5 mar 2019 · Case Summary of New York v. Quarles: After officers received a description of an assailant, one officer followed the suspect into a supermarket. Spotting respondent Quarles (the suspect), the officer ordered him to stop. The officer frisked Quarles and discovered that he was wearing an empty shoulder holster.
After receiving the description of Quarles, an alleged assailant, a police officer entered a supermarket, spotted him, and ordered him to stop. Quarles stopped and was frisked by the officer. Upon detecting an empty shoulder holster, the officer asked Quarles where his gun was. Quarles responded.
29 kwi 2019 · On September 11, 1980 officer Frank Kraft entered an A&P supermarket while on patrol in Queens, New York. He identified a man, Benjamin Quarles, who matched the description of an assailant armed with a gun. Officer Kraft moved to detain Quarles, pursuing him through the aisles.
Respondent was charged in a New York state court with criminal possession of a weapon. The record showed that a woman approached two police officers who were on road patrol, told them that she had just been raped, described her assailant, and told them that the man had just entered a nearby supermarket and was carrying a gun.
NEW YORK v. QUARLES 467 U.S. 649 (1984) justice william rehnquist, for a 5–4 Supreme Court, announced a public safety exception to the miranda rules.
