State v. Woodell

“The state appeals from an order granting defendant’s pretrial motion to suppress statements that defendant made prior to her arrest for driving under the influence of intoxicants, operating a vehicle without driving privileges, and refusing to take a test for intoxicants.”

The Defendant contends that, given the compelling circumstances the officer subjected her to, Miranda warnings were required. “Under Article I, section 12, of the Oregon Constitution a person is entitled to Miranda warnings when they are in … compelling circumstances. Circumstances are compelling when an encounter with police amounts to the ‘police-dominated atmosphere that Miranda warnings were intended to counteract.’ State v. Roble-Baker, 340 Or 631, 64 (2006).” The Court concludes that the circumstances Defendant was subjected to were not compelling so as to require Miranda warnings because Defendant met the sergeant on a public road, was briefly questioned by one officer without threats or force, and was not confronted with evidence of probable cause to arrest nor heightened level of confinement. Thus, trial court erred. Reversed.