P.

P. v. Scott CA2/6

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 15, 2013B244735California1,395 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

On June 5, 2012, police officer Timothy Wedemeyer conducted a parole search at Scott's residence. He asked Scott to "step outside" so he could conduct a search of "his person." Scott complied. In searching Scott's right pants pocket, Wedemeyer "felt a baggie consistent with narcotics." As Wedemeyer started to pull it "out of the pocket," Scott said, "Man this is fucked up. Why are you guys here? Now I'm really fucked." Wedemeyer asked Scott, "[W]hat's in the bag?" Scott responded, "You know what it is. It's meth. Now I'm really fucked." In a pretrial motion, Scott moved to exclude all the statements he made during the parole search. The trial court denied the motion.

DISCUSSION

Admissibility of Scott's Initial Statements to the Police Scott contends the trial court erred by admitting the first statements he made during the parole search - "Man this is fucked up. Why are you guys here? Now I'm really fucked." (Italics added.) He claims they are inadmissible under Miranda v. Arizona, supra, 384 U.S. 436 because he did not receive a Miranda warning prior to making them. The People contend these remarks to Officer Wedemeyer were…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.