This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
The linked opinion is about a case argued before the Wisconsin Court of Appeals, in which a child defendant "Thomas" seeks to exclude his confession from a Children in need of Protection (CHIPS) proceeding, on the argument that the questioning officer ought to have read him his Miranda rights. It's vaguely hilarious as the text switches between "Thomas" (really his legal representation) citing case law to the court and the justices noting that Thomas probably was too young to meaningfully understand the Miranda rights anyway.
The article, on the other hand, describes a case argued before the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals regarding the improper exclusion of a juror on the basis that he might have decided how to vote not based on the evidence. It's funny in a different way, as the prosecutor attempted to disallow a juror for not making eye contact, and, reading between the lines, the juror was offended and refused to vote for conviction. 71.66.240.202 (talk) 19:15, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
