P. v. Estupinian CA1/1
Defendant Rafael I. Estupinian was convicted of assaulting Maria C. at a house in which Maria and defendant rented rooms. During trial, the state introduced statements defendant made in a police interview subsequent to being given the warning prescribed by Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 (Miranda). Defendant contends that these statements should have been excluded because the police withheld the Miranda warnings until partway through the interview. We find substantial evidence to support the trial court’s conclusion that the police were not attempting to undermine Miranda by waiting to read defendant his rights, and affirm.
Comments on P. v. Estupinian CA1/1