Oregon Appellate Court - September 11, 2013

by: Alarson and Abassos • September 11, 2013 • no comments

Miranda Warnings – Renewing Warnings: Passage of Time Alone May Not Be Enough to Warrant a Material Change in Circumstances

A defendant must be re-advised of his Miranda rights when the circumstances have materially changed from when the rights were originally given. Here, the defendant was advised of his rights three times, two of which happened the day before the incriminating statements were made. The court found that prior warnings were still intact because the detectives were the same, the subject matter was the same, the defendant re-initiated contact with the officers after invoking his right to counsel and the defendant understood his rights. The court distinguished these facts from State v. Metz. In Metz, the circumstances materially changed when the defendant was advised of his rights in an interrogation by police officers and the next day made incriminating statements to a state psychologist during an exam. State v. Hurtado-Navarrete, 258 Or App ___ (2013)