170 So. 3d 542
Miss. Ct. App.2014Background
- Shortly after a pharmacy burglary, deputy found Houston running from scene wearing dark clothes and mask carrying a bag; he dropped the bag and was subdued and arrested. The bag contained stolen prescription drugs.
- Houston was Mirandized and initially declined to speak. Later he asked to speak to investigators and gave an oral confession and a signed written statement; he acknowledged understanding his rights but refused to sign a Miranda waiver form.
- Houston testified at a suppression hearing that he had requested medical attention for a head injury and that officers withheld treatment until he confessed; he also claimed officers prompted details of the confession.
- Investigators Cross and Henderson testified Houston was not bleeding or intoxicated, was advised of rights, voluntarily spoke, and wrote/signed the statement; they denied promising treatment or supplying robbery details.
- The trial court held a voluntariness hearing, denied Houston’s request for a subpoena duces tecum for jail medical records, admitted the confession, and a jury convicted Houston of business burglary; sentence: seven years and $1,500 fine.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of confession | Houston: confession involuntary — withheld medical care and officers supplied details, coercing statement | State: investigators testified confession was voluntary, Houston understood rights, no threats/promises, not intoxicated | Court: confession voluntary under totality of circumstances; admission not error |
| Denial of subpoena duces tecum for jail medical records | Houston: records relevant to voluntariness and should be subpoenaed during suppression hearing | State: records not necessary; records in State possession and obtainable via discovery; no showing of relevance or prejudice | Court: denial not an abuse of discretion; subpoena unnecessary and Houston failed to proffer records or show miscarriage of justice |
Key Cases Cited
- Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) (volunteered statements not barred by Fifth Amendment)
- Gavin v. State, 473 So.2d 952 (Miss. 1985) (voluntariness is factual inquiry under totality of circumstances)
- Greenlee v. State, 725 So.2d 816 (Miss. 1998) (trial court's voluntariness finding will not be reversed if supported)
- Haymer v. State, 613 So.2d 837 (Miss. 1993) (standards for review of confession admissibility)
- Wiley v. State, 465 So.2d 318 (Miss. 1985) (conflicting evidence on voluntariness reviewed deferentially)
- Johnson v. State, 511 So.2d 1360 (Miss. 1987) (no single factor is dispositive in totality analysis)
- Millsap v. State, 767 So.2d 286 (Miss. Ct. App. 2000) (State must prove voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt at suppression hearing)
- Morris v. State, 798 So.2d 603 (Miss. Ct. App. 2001) (procedures and burdens for contested confessions)
- Sykes v. State, 749 So.2d 239 (Miss. Ct. App. 1999) (defendant’s burden to rebut State’s prima facie case)
- Williams v. State, 125 So.2d 535 (Miss. 1960) (denial of subpoena duces tecum not reversible error absent miscarriage of justice)