In re Joseph H.

Good Law
200 Cal. Rptr. 3d 1·367 P.3d 1
Supreme Court of CaliforniaOctober 16, 2015No. S227929.California2,824 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Liu, J.

**1 I write to explain why I believe this case merits our review.

Petitioner Joseph H., at age 10, shot and killed his sleeping father and then confessed to a police detective during a custodial interview. A video recording of the interview shows Joseph sitting on a couch next to his stepmother, Krista McCary, whose husband Joseph had just killed. Riverside Police Detective Roberta Hopewell sat in an adjacent chair; she was courteous and not overbearing. At the beginning of the interview, Detective Hopewell informed Joseph of his Miranda rights, and he purported to waive them. ( Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 .) In a published opinion, the Court of Appeal found that "Joseph's responses indicated he understood" his Miranda rights and that he validly waived his rights "despite his young age, his ADHD [attention deficit hyperactivity disorder ], and low-average intelligence." ( In re Joseph H. (2015) 237 Cal.App.4th 517 , 535, 188 Cal.Rptr.3d 171 .)

In 2011, Joseph was one of 613 children under the age of 12 arrested for a felony in California. (Cal. Dept. of Justice, Juvenile Justice in California (2011) p. 59, table 4.) This case raises an…

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.