What is the current state of the law on a motion to suppress a statement under the Miranda rights?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. Mackey, 2d Crim. No. B295661 (Cal. App. 2020):

And we'll write it down." Appellant contends that, by these remarks, the police "in substance . . . told appellant that he should trust the police, not his lawyer, and that if appellant did not talk to them he would never again have the opportunity to tell his side of the story." But counsel cannot deprive a defendant of his right to testify at trial. (People v. Robles (1970) 2 Cal.3d 205, 215 ["the right to testify in one's own behalf is of such fundamental importance that a defendant who timely demands to take the stand contrary to the advice given by his counsel has the right to give an exposition of his defense before a jury"].)

"The inquiry [into whether appellant waived his right to counsel and to remain silent] has two distinct dimensions. [Citations.] First, the relinquishment of the right must have been voluntary in the sense that it was the product of a free and deliberate choice rather than intimidation, coercion, or deception. Second, the waiver must have been made with a full awareness of both the nature of the right being abandoned and the consequences of the decision to abandon it. Only if the 'totality of the circumstances surrounding the interrogation' reveals both an uncoerced choice and the requisite level of comprehension may a court properly conclude that the Miranda rights have been waived." (Moran v. Burbine (1986) 475 U.S. 412, 421.)

The standard of review is de novo: "An appellate court applies the independent or de novo standard of review, which by its nature is nondeferential, to a trial court's granting or denial of a motion to suppress a statement under Miranda insofar as the trial court's underlying decision entails a measurement of the facts against the law." (People v. Waidla (2000) 22 Cal.4th 690,

Page 6

730.) "After independent review, we believe that the [trial] court did not err in denying [appellant's] motion." (Ibid.)

Other Questions


What is the current state of the law on the Miranda rights of a suspect who has given a voluntary but unwarned statement? (California, United States of America)
Is a motion to suppress certain incriminatory statements taken by the police from petitioner allegedly in violation of his Miranda rights denied? (California, United States of America)
What is the current state of the law on a motion to suppress or suppress the testimony of an informant in a criminal case? (California, United States of America)
What is the current state of the law on the Miranda Miranda Miranda privilege? (California, United States of America)
Does a suspect who has received and understood the Miranda warning, and has not invoked his Miranda rights, waives his right to remain silent by making an uncoerced statement to the police? (California, United States of America)
What is the current state of the law in the context of the Miranda Miranda Miranda warning? (California, United States of America)
What is the current state of the law in the context of the Miranda rights test? (California, United States of America)
Is counsel incompetent in denying a defendant's motion to exclude his statements to the police in violation of Miranda v. Miranda? (California, United States of America)
What is the current state of the law in the context of the Miranda Miranda safeguards? (California, United States of America)
What is the current state of the law on how to suppress or suppress evidence of a break-in at the home of an alleged drug dealer? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.