State v. Adkins, 2011 Ohio 5360

Appellant Christopher Adkins was convicted by jury of rape (F1), kidnapping (F1), and felonious assault (F2) based on statements made during a custodial interrogation following an alleged rape at a Scioto County campground in August 2009.
Detective Conkel advised Miranda rights prior to interrogation; rights were read again due to equipment malfunction; no written waiver obtained.
During the nearly four-hour interrogation, Appellant intermittently asked to speak with an attorney and indicated a desire not to speak with police.
Appellant admitted to approaching Sissel, removing her clothing, and engaging in intercourse, then stopping due to conscience and fear of prison.
Appellant moved to suppress the statements on grounds of violation of right to counsel/remain silent and coercion; the trial court denied the motion, and the jury heard the video and witness testimony.
The trial court also found Appellant guilty of sexually violent predator and repeat violent offender specifications, which were tried to the court, and the judgments were affirmed on appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Miranda rights were properly given and waived before interrogation.	Adkins argues no proper waiver; rights were not clearly waived.	State contends rights were given and impliedly waived when Adkins spoke.	Waiver implied; interrogation permissible.
Whether the interrogation was coercive or involuntary due to promises and conduct of officers.	Coercive promises/condoned conduct overbore will.	Promises were not coercive; totality of circumstances supports voluntariness.	No coercion; statements voluntary.

Berghuis v. Thompkins, 560 U.S. 370 (2010) (implicit waiver of right to remain silent if rights understood)
State v. Edwards, 49 Ohio St.2d 31 (1976) (requires knowing, voluntary waiver; implicit allowed per Thompkins)
Berghuis v. Thompkins, 130 S. Ct. 2250 (2010) (implicit waiver acknowledged by Thompkins decision)
State v. Colquitt, 188 Ohio App.3d 509 (2010) (invocation of right to counsel must be unambiguous)
State v. Wiles, 59 Ohio St.3d 71 (1991) (promises/deception considered in voluntariness analysis)
State v. Cooey, 46 Ohio St.3d 20 (1989) (admonitions to tell the truth are not coercive)