Gary Hanneman v. Attorney General of the State

MEMORANDUM

We are familiar with the record. We do not ignore Hanneman’s arguments nor do we ignore the sentence now faced by Hanneman. Our charge, though, is to resolve the legal questions presented.

Hanneman made a confession that justified his conviction and his conviction justified his sentence. He argues that he was in custody at the time and that he was not given his Miranda warnings.

The record provides a detailed analysis of the circumstances surrounding his interview. We consider whether a reasonable person, under the totality of the circumstances, would have felt free to end the interrogation and leave. Howes v. Fields, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 1181, 1189 , 182 L.Ed.2d 17 (2012).

Hanneman voluntarily agreed to the interview, drove his own vehicle to the site, was not restrained, and was told that he was not under arrest and could leave at any time.

The state court applied the totality of the circumstances test and took into account “the age of the accused, education and intelligence level of the accused, police advisement of the accused’s constitutional rights, length of detention, nature of questioning, and use of any physical punishment.” The court ultimately concluded…