Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Advocates
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Advocates
Judges

STATE of Utah, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. John Robert COOK, Defendant and Appellant.

HENRIOD, Justice.

Appeal from an automobile homicide conviction in a case tried to a jury. Affirmed.

Utah Code Annotated, 76-30-7.4 (1967 Supp.).

This is a case where defendant drove into the opposite lane of traffic in his car which was loaded with empty beer and whiskey bottles. He collided head-on with a car driven in a lawful manner by decedent's husband in his outside lane. The defendant recited the facts to peace officers after being properly advised of his constitutional rights under any formula espoused by Miranda or Escobedo or anything else, — as the record clearly reflects. We think it quite unnecessary to recite the circumstances.

384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966).

378 U.S. 478, 84 S.Ct. 1758, 12 L.Ed.2d 977 (1964).

Defendant says: 1) That his confession was elicited in violation of the cases cited above, with which urgence completely we disagree; 2) that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the verdict, with which urgence we disagree even more emphatically; and 3) that a state witness talked with a juror, which contention was refuted successfully by affidavit and otherwise. Such contention has no merit.

CROCKETT, C. J., and CALLISTER, TUCKETT and ELLETT, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

STATE v. COOK
(Apr 15, 1968)