Charles S. POPE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Carl ZENON, Superintendent, OSCI, Et Al., Respondents-Appellees

Charles S. Pope is a convicted murderer serving a life sentence in an Oregon penitentiary. He timely appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. His principle claim is that evidence obtained by homicide detectives in violation of the rules of custodial interrogation established by the Supreme Court in Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), fatally tainted his conviction. Although we agree with Mr. Pope that the detectives violated Miranda by subjecting him to custodial interrogation before advising him of his constitutional rights, and that it was error to use the traceable product of this improper interrogation against him, we are convinced that this transgression did not — under the facts and circumstances of this case — have any “substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury’s verdict.” Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 619 , -, 113 S.Ct. 1710, 1722 , 123 L.Ed.2d 353 (1993). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s denial of his petition.

I

The Interrogation

The pertinent facts inevitably provide an essential part of the means required to assess a claim such as Mr. Pope’s. As…