P.

P. v. Lopez CA4/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 28, 2013E054132California1,878 words

Opinion

Opinion

DISCUSSION

During trial, defendant requested a foundation hearing as to the introduction of his

statements to Sergeant Mooney, claiming a Miranda violation. After the jury was

excused, Sergeant Mooney testified that prior to interviewing defendant, he read

2 The taped interview was played for the jury, and a transcription of the interview was admitted into evidence.

3 defendant his Miranda rights from a card; and that defendant had agreed to speak with

him. The following colloquy occurred between defendant and Sergeant Mooney:

“MOONEY: Having these rights in mind, do you, will you talk to me and answer

some questions I have —

“[DEFENDANT]: Well —

“MOONEY: — of you?

“[DEFENDANT]: No.

“MOONEY: You don’t want to talk to me?

“[DEFENDANT]: No, uh, what did you say?

“MOONEY: I said having those rights in mind –

“[DEFENDANT]: Oh, Okay . . .

“MOONEY: Understanding those rights, will you talk to me if, if I, about, answer

some questions I have?

“[DEFENDANT]: Yeah.”

In response to defense counsel’s question, “But we just heard the tape and

[defendant] did say ‘No,’” Sergeant Mooney explained, “He—he looked like he was—

didn’t fully understand, and so that is why I…

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.