State v. Doyle

Defendant challenged a judgment of conviction for one count of second degree sodomy and two counts of first degree sexual abuse, contending that the trial court erred when it denied his motion to suppress statements that he made during a custodial interview at the Washington County Jail. Defendant argued that the investigating detectives violated his right to remain silent and right to counsel under Article I, section 12, of the Oregon Constitution and the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and that those Miranda violations affected the validity of his subsequent waiver of his constitutional rights at the jail. Defendant also argued that the statements that he made at the jail were based on an implied promise of leniency and were involuntary. During the initial questioning of Defendant at his home, Defendant requested to speak with an attorney, and the officer's subsequent questioning was a violation of Defendant's rights. However, this initial violation did not effect Defendant's statements at the jail, given the amount of time between the two interrogations, that officer's provided Defendant his Miranda rights, and Defendant confirmed he understood his rights before he began making statements at the second interview. As to Defendant's second contention, his statements made were made voluntarily and were not made in response to an implied promise of leniency given the totality of the circumstances. Affirmed.