State v. Boyd

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Criminal Procedure
  • Date Filed: 03-25-2015
  • Case #: A151157
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Egan, J. for the Court; Armstrong, P.J.; & Nakamoto, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

Reinitiation of interrogation by a defendant after claiming his right to an attorney constitutes voluntarily and knowingly waiving his Miranda rights.

Defendant was convicted of murder; Defendant was brought to the police station and asked to remove his blood stained boots, and submit to photographs of his injured hand and a swab of his hand. Defendant refused to return the swab, saying “You ain’t getting my DNA without my attorney.” Defendant continued to talk after arrest, and when addressed while in holding he stated he no longer wanted an attorney and understood his rights; Defendant then made incriminating statements after requesting the original officer. On appeal, Defendant argued the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress statements made after he invoked is right to an attorney, maintaining that officers reinitiated interrogation. The State responded that the officer’s questions were not reinitiation, and that it was Defendant’s statements that reinitiated interrogation. The Court held the initial conversation in holding was not a reinitiation of interrogation, but that his request for the original officer, and his disclosures afterwards, caused Defendant to voluntarily and knowingly waive his Miranda rights. Affirmed.

Advanced Search