DM v. State
949 N.E.2d 327
| Ind. | 2011Background
- D.M., a 13-year-old, and a friend burglarized a residence; police arrested them after receiving tip about the break-in.
- Mother was told D.M. had been arrested and sought to discuss rights; officers restricted contact until waiver.
- Detective Quigley advised rights using a Juvenile Waiver form, then allowed private time for Mother and D.M. to talk
- Mother and D.M. signed advisement; they then signed the waiver; D.M. confessed during questioning.
- The juvenile court admitted the confession at factfinding; the Court of Appeals affirmed, remanding for transfer to Indiana Supreme Court
- The Supreme Court granted transfer and vacated the Court of Appeals’ unpublished decision, consolidating the case for review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was meaningful consultation with Mother before waiver | D.M. contends no meaningful consultation occurred | State asserts private, unpressured opportunity for consultation occurred | Substantial evidence supports meaningful consultation |
| Whether the waiver of rights was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary | Waiver was involuntary due to pressure/uncertainty | Waiver was voluntary under totality of circumstances | Waiver knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily; confession admissible |
| Whether the waiver form was clear enough to prevent ambiguity | Form deficiencies caused confusion about process | Form would have been clearer to prevent disputes | Form deficiencies noted; recommended clarifications to improve future use |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Gault, 387 N.E.2d 1 (U.S. Supreme Court 1967) (juvenile due process and custodial interrogation safeguards)
- Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (U.S. Supreme Court 1966) (waiver and advisement requirements)
- Lewis v. State, 259 Ind. 431 (Ind. 1972) (fourfold safeguard for juvenile waivers; meaningful consultation required)
- Trowbridge v. State, 717 N.E.2d 138 (Ind. 1999) (private consultation time free from police pressure must occur before waiver)
- Patton v. State, 588 N.E.2d 494 (Ind. 1992) (consultation must be private and informed)