P.

INTRODUCTION

A jury found defendant and appellant Guillermo Parra (defendant) guilty on ten counts of aggravated sexual assault of a minor and two counts of rape. On appeal, defendant contends that the trial court erred in denying his pretrial motion to suppress statements he made to a police investigator because prior to making the statements, defendant unambiguously invoked his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. Defendant further contends that the trial court erred by failing to give instructions on lesser included offenses of rape. And defendant argues that the cumulative effect of these claimed errors deprived him of a fair trial. We hold that because defendant did not unambiguously invoke his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent during the police interview in question, the trial court did not err in denying his suppression motion. We further hold that the trial court did not have a sua sponte duty to instruct the jury on lesser included offenses of rape. Therefore, we affirm the judgment of conviction.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

A. Prosecution’s Case T.H., who was eighteen at the time of trial, and her older brother and sister came to live with their aunt E. in the…