Sauceda-Contreras

People v. Sauceda-Contreras

Caution
145 Cal. Rptr. 3d 271·2012 Cal. LEXIS 7370·55 Cal. 4th 203·2012 WL 3263996·282 P.3d 279
Supreme Court of CaliforniaAugust 13, 2012S191747California7,299 words

Opinion

Opinion

Baxter, J.

Defendant Jose Sauceda-Contreras was arrested on suspicion of murdering his former girlfriend, Martha Mendoza, after he was found burning her body in a large metal trash can in his backyard. He was transported to the police station, and with the assistance of an officer interpreting for him in Spanish, was apprised that he had a right to remain silent, that anything he said could be used against him in a court of law, that he had a right to the assistance of counsel during the interview, and that if he wanted a lawyer and could not afford one, counsel would be appointed for him at no cost. (.Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 [ 16 L.Ed.2d 694 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 ] {Miranda).) Defendant clearly indicated that he understood each of those rights. When then asked, “Having in mind these rights that I just read, the detective would like to know if he can speak with you right now,” defendant responded, “If you can bring me a lawyer, that way I[,] I with who . . . that way I can tell you everything that I know and everything that I need to tell you and someone to represent me.”

Seeking clarification, the officer asked defendant, “Okay, perhaps you didn’t understand your rights.…

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.