Opinion ID: 1878755
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The Admissibility of Glass's Statements

Text: For his first point, Glass argues that the trial court erred in failing to suppress and admitting into evidence statements made by Glass to Sergeant Lawzano of the Hannibal Police Department and Sergeant Platte of the Missouri Highway Patrol. Glass makes three arguments. First, Glass argues the statements were the resultthe `forbidden fruit'of Travis' illegal detention without probable cause and no intervening events were sufficient to attenuate the taint of the illegal arrest. Second, Glass argues the statements made to Sgt. Lawzano should have been suppressed because they were obtained by his custodial questioning of Glass without first administering Miranda warnings. Third, Glass argues the statements made to Sgt. Platte should have been suppressed because he elicited them by using the unwarned statements Travis had made to Sgt. Lawzano. [4]