Johnson v. State, 129 So. 3d 148

Johnson, his fiancée Clay, and Truss were at Johnson's home when officers executed a search warrant and found cocaine; Clay was not arrested.
Johnson was given and signed a Miranda warning at the Leake County Jail, and then signed a written statement admitting the cocaine was his.
Johnson was indicted for possession of cocaine between two and ten grams and as a second drug offender, with trial held May 8, 2012.
Defense moved to suppress the statement as involuntary due to a promise to forego charges against Clay and for a defective Miranda warning.
The suppression hearing found the Miranda warning sufficient and the statement admissible; on appeal, Johnson challenges both the voluntariness of the confession and the sufficiency of the Miranda warning.
The Mississippi Supreme Court affirms, holding the confession voluntary and the waiver form adequate, and that the warning reasonably conveyed Johnson's rights.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was the confession voluntarily made?	Johnson argues coercion via promise not to charge Clay.	State asserts credibility of officers and no coercion.	No manifest error; confession voluntary.
Was the Miranda warning defective for omitting the right to consult counsel?	Johnson claims warning lacked right-to-consult counsel language.	Warning adequately conveyed right to counsel; language nonessential.	Not defective; warning adequate and admissible.

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (U.S. 1966) (requires informing of rights prior to custodial interrogation; exact form not required)
Duckworth v. Eagan, 492 U.S. 195 (U.S. 1989) (warnings need not be in exact form; must convey rights reasonably)
Byrom v. State, 863 So.2d 836 (Miss. 2003) (informing of right to consult with counsel; convictions affirmed)
Glasper v. State, 914 So.2d 708 (Miss. 2005) (trial judge credibility as fact-finder given deference in voluntariness determinations)