P. v. Locke

Filed 4/28/06 P. v. Locke CA3

Received for posting 8/31/06

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Sacramento)

----

Defendant Lloyd Philip Locke entered a negotiated plea of no contest to six counts of committing forcible and nonforcible lewd acts on his daughter (Pen. Code, § 288, subds. (a), (b)), and one count of making a criminal threat (Pen. Code, § 422), as to which it was also alleged he personally used a firearm (Pen. Code, §§ 1203.06, subd. (a)(1), 12022.5, subd. (a)(1)).

He contends on appeal his statements during a police interrogation were unlawfully elicited in violation of Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 [16 L.Ed.2d 694] (Miranda), and were otherwise involuntary. We disagree and shall affirm the judgment.

BACKGROUND

Following a fight with her father (the defendant), the

17-year-old victim reported he had assaulted her with a knife and a stick, had pointed guns at her, and had fired at least one of them. She drew a map of the house, identifying where the weapons could be found, and consented to a search of the house for weapons. She also told officers defendant had been sexually molesting her since she was five.

Deputies contacted defendant around 3:30 p.m. He admitted threatening his daughter with a knife and admitted drinking whisky after fighting with her. He had a strong odor of alcohol, spoke quickly, and moved from side to side as he spoke.

Placed under arrest for assault with a deadly weapon, making criminal threats, and child abuse, defendant consented to a search of the house for weapons.

When Deputy Oania read defendant his Miranda rights and asked if he understood them, defendant responded, â€