Case Citator › Crooker v. California

Crooker v. California

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Overruled
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
357 U.S. 433
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
29 of 29
Citing cases (total)
29
Treatment dates
1966
Overruled
A reviewed court has overruled this case. Crooker v. California was overruled on the use of statements obtained during custodial questioning without counsel safeguards. Miranda v. Arizona expressly directed courts not to follow Crooker in light of its new interrogation rules.
More on how this was screened

That treatment is listed below. All 29 flagged citations have been read. Later courts continue to cite Crooker for separate propositions, including the right to counsel of one's choice and the assessment of a confession's voluntariness.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

29 later cases cite Crooker v. California; 29 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Crooker v. California?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Overruled

  • The Supreme Court directed courts not to follow Crooker's rule permitting the use of a voluntary confession obtained after police denied a suspect's request to contact counsel.

    Miranda v. Arizona · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    In accordance with our holdings today and in Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U. S. 478, 492, Crooker v. California, 357 U. S. 433 (1958) and Cicenia v. Lagay, 357 U. S. 504 (1958) are not to be followed.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Crooker v. California and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace