Bichara

*1264 This case concerns the impact of defendant Armando Bichara's recorded confession to murder on his convictions for murder and kidnapping. Defendant initially waived his right to remain silent under Miranda , 1 but invoked the right prior to confessing to the murder, unambiguously stating to the interrogating officers, "I refuse to talk to you guys." Defense counsel forfeited defendant's challenge to admission of the confession on this ground by failing to specifically and timely object at trial. We hold that counsel's inaction resulted in a prejudicial denial of effective assistance of counsel as to the murder conviction, as the prosecutor relied upon the confession heavily in her arguments to the jury. Defendant, however, was not prejudiced with respect to the kidnapping conviction. Evidence of that offense consisted of the victim's testimony, surveillance video capturing the crime, and corroborating testimony from two independent witnesses. Defendant did not mention the kidnapping in his confession, nor did the prosecutor rely on it when arguing the kidnapping charge. We therefore reverse the murder conviction, affirm the kidnapping conviction, and remand to the trial court…

The interrogation of defendant Armando Bichara presents a textbook violation of *917 Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 ( Miranda ). Not only did the interviewing detectives refuse to honor defendant's unambiguous invocation of his right to cut off further questioning during the interrogation, 1 the testimony of one of the detectives later at trial revealed a fundamental misunderstanding or unawareness of what Miranda and its progeny require. 2 *1289 I therefore concur in the judgment that the Miranda violation compels reversal of defendant's murder conviction.

I respectfully dissent, however, from the holding that the admission of the incriminating statements obtained in violation of Miranda did not prejudice the jury's finding that defendant kidnapped his girlfriend Guadalupe Montellano. I will summarize several reasons why; they involve my disagreement with the majority about the relationship between the murder and kidnapping charges, the mediocre quality of the video footage introduced at trial, and the fact that the video does not, and cannot, corroborate the key element of fear that Montellano emphasized as the reason why, according to her, she got in…