State v. Hogan, 2014 N.C. App. LEXIS 559

Deputies responded to a domestic disturbance at the home shared by Francis Hogan and Karen Teixeira on Sept. 16, 2012; Hogan was found hiding in a closet and handcuffed for officer-safety reasons.
Deputy Reliford escorted Hogan to the back deck to calm him and speak outside the victim’s presence; Deputy Carroll left to respond to another call, leaving one officer with both parties.
Reliford questioned Hogan on the back deck without giving Miranda warnings; Hogan made inculpatory statements.
Reliford then asked Teixeira to step onto the deck; she described bruising to her neck and said Hogan had choked and pushed her; Hogan then spontaneously admitted he had squeezed her neck and pushed her into a wall.
Trial court suppressed statements made in direct response to Reliford’s questioning (pre-arrest questioning) but denied suppression of Hogan’s later admission as a spontaneous statement and ruled asking Teixeira what happened was not the functional equivalent of interrogation.
Hogan entered an Alford plea to assault by strangulation preserving his right to appeal the partial suppression ruling; he also appealed sentencing, contesting classification of a New Jersey third-degree theft conviction as a Class I felony for prior record calculation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Hogan’s admission made after Teixeira spoke was the product of custodial interrogation requiring Miranda warnings	The State: questioning Teixeira was part of an on-scene investigation and not interrogation of Hogan; Hogan’s admission was spontaneous and admissible	Hogan: asking Teixeira what happened in his presence was the functional equivalent of interrogation and Hogan’s admission should be suppressed for lack of Miranda warnings	Court held the deputy’s question to Teixeira was not the functional equivalent of interrogation; Hogan’s admission was spontaneous and admissible; suppression denial affirmed
Whether a New Jersey third-degree theft conviction should count as a Class I felony for prior record level or be reclassified as a misdemeanor substantially similar to NC larceny	The State: presented certified NJ criminal history indicating the conviction is a felony-equivalent (punishable by >1 year) and thus properly treated as a Class I felony unless defendant proves substantial similarity to an NC misdemeanor	Hogan: NJ law does not use the term "felony" and third-degree theft is not a felony; alternatively, it is substantially similar to NC misdemeanor larceny and should not carry felony points	Court held the NJ conviction may be treated as a felony-equivalent (certified record sufficed) and Hogan failed to prove substantial similarity to NC misdemeanor larceny; sentencing affirmed

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) (establishes requirement of warnings for custodial interrogation)
Rhode Island v. Innis, 446 U.S. 291 (1980) (defines "interrogation" to include its functional equivalent likely to elicit incriminating responses)
State v. Fuller, 270 N.C. 710 (1967) (police conduct that coerces a defendant to speak in response to a witness’ accusation can require suppression)
State v. Gantt, 161 N.C. App. 265 (2003) (officer words that do not call for a response from the suspect are less likely to be the functional equivalent of interrogation)
State v. Lindsey, 118 N.C. App. 549 (1995) (discusses treatment of out-of-state convictions not labeled as felonies for NC sentencing purposes)
State v. Hinton, 196 N.C. App. 750 (2009) (addresses default treatment of out-of-state felonies as Class I felonies for prior record without State proving substantial similarity)