Jimmie Leon Pollard v. George Galaza

Good Law
2002 Daily Journal DAR 5255·290 F.3d 1030·2002 WL 979895·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4122·2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 9123
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 14, 200200-16210California2,202 words

Opinion

Opinion

King, J.

We must decide whether the state court correctly allowed the government to use a statement, obtained in violation of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), at trial for impeachment purposes.

I

This case arises out of habeas petitioner Jimmie Leon Pollard’s conviction in a California state court for second-degree murder and trespassing. After Pollard was arrested and taken into custody, he was held in the police station interview room. About three hours after his arrest, Pollard was sleeping when Detective Bob Stratton of the Bakersfield police awakened him for fingerprinting. After Pollard was fingerprinted at the lab, he was returned to the interview room. About fifteen minutes after that, Detective Stratton started to question him. Detective Stratton read Pollard his Miranda rights and Pollard stated that he understood his rights and that he did not want to speak to Detective Stratton. After a brief pause, Pollard initiated further conversation by asking Detective Stratton what happened. Detective Stratton informed Pollard that a man had been killed and that Pollard was seen leaving the apartment. Detective Stratton continued the…

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.