County Court’s Suppression of Statements and Fruits of Search Reversed
The Third Department reversed County Court’s suppression of defendant’s statements and County Court’s finding that defendant had not voluntarily consented to the search of his car (both based on the absence of Miranda warnings). The Third Department determined a reasonable person innocent of a crime would still have felt he was free to leave (i.e., that he was not in custody) after his failure of field sobriety tests and a negative alcosensor test. The Third Department further noted that the failure to provide Miranda warnings would not necessarily render a consent to search involuntary:
The court ….overlooked the settled proposition that “[a] temporary roadside detention pursuant to a routine traffic stop is not custodial within the meaning of Miranda” … .The facts here reveal a reasonable initial interrogation attendant to a roadside detention that was merely investigatory…. The Troopers’ inquiries, the mixed results of the field sobriety tests and a negative alcosensor test would not have caused a reasonable person innocent of any wrongdoing to believe that he or she was in custody…. In our view, the Troopers’ observations of defendant’s condition justified the further detention for the limited purpose of investigating whether he was operating his motor vehicle in an impaired condition… . People v Brown, 105134, 3rd Dept 6-27-13