State v. Erazo, 254 N.J. 277 (2023)


Alan Silber argued before the New Jersey Supreme Court on behalf of amicus curiae ACDL-NJ that the defendant's statements were not made knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily. The Court unfortunately rejected the argument that failure to administer Miranda warnings to the 18-year-old defendant, who suffered from severe mental illness, and who was, unbeknownst to him, the primary suspect in a murder case, violated his rights under the Fifth Amendment. The Court ruled both of the defendant's statements were admissible, the first statement because the Court found he was not in custody and therefore Miranda warnings did not need to be administered, and the second because it found that the defendant "received and understood" his Miranda rights. Katie Beilin co-authored the brief.


Jump to Page

By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use