This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

A house was burglarized. A witness contacted the sheriff's office, implicating Elstad (D). Officers Burke and McAllister went to D's house with a warrant for his arrest. Burke sat down with D in the living room, and without telling him that he had a warrant for his arrest, stated that he 'felt' that D was involved in the burglary. D replied, 'Yes, I was there.' D was transported to headquarters. An hour later, McAllister, in the presence of Burke, advised D of his Miranda rights for the first time. D agreed to talk and signed a statement. The trial judge excluded the remark D made in his living room but admitted the statement made at the sheriff's office. D was convicted. The Oregon Court of Appeals reversed, stating that there wasn't a sufficient break in the stream of events between the inadmissible statement in the living room and the written confession in the sheriff's office. The State (P) appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.