Elias

Defendant was charged with the murder of his baby stepson Ronald. He pleaded not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity. After a court trial he was found guilty of murder in the second degree. The court found that he had been sane at the time of the murder.

On appeal the sufficiency of the evidence to support the finding of guilt and the determination that defendant had been sane is conceded. Therefore, we omit any description of the crime. Defendant’s only point is that certain incriminating statements should not have heen admitted in evidence. He argues that in view of his mental condition he lacked any capacity to waive his constitutional right to silence.

These are the facts surrounding defendant’s incriminating statements: defendant was arrested at 1:30 p.m., at his sister’s home, about a month after the murder. He was given a warning which in all respects complied with the mandate of Miranda [ 384 U.S. 436 ( 16 L.Ed.2d 694 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 10 A.L.R.3d 974 )]. Sergeant Smith, one of the arresting officers, asked defendant whether he understood what he was being told. Defendant remained mute. Smith then repeated the Miranda warning and again asked defendant whether he…