A.K.M. v. Commonwealth, 212-CA-1190 (not yet final)(not to be published):
AKM was interrogated twice while
at school regarding an alleged theft of $20-$40 from the teacher’s
lounge. The first interrogation was conducted by the school principal
while an officer, who was at the school initially on an unrelated matter, was
in the next room. After AKM admitted to taking the money to the Principal, he
was brought to the police officer who informed him of his Miranda rights and
questioned him again, yielding a second confession. During the second
interrogation AKM repeatedly stated that he did not want to tell on
himself.
The Appellant raised several issues on appeal, including that
the first interrogation violated Miranda under N.C. and Welch
because the purpose of the questioning was to gather evidence for a criminal
prosecution, that the second confession was tainted and coerced, and that the
Appellant asserted his right to remain silent during the second
interrogation. The Court of Appeals found that Miranda warnings were not
necessary for the first interrogation because, distinguishing from N.C., the
principal was “acting only as a principal investigating a school disciplinary
matter” and there was no evidence that the principal was acting in concert with
the police officers. As to the second interrogation, the Court found that
AKM was in custody at the time of the police interrogation and had invoked his
right to remain silent by stating, “I don’t want to tell on myself” and that
continued questioning violated the 5th amendment. The Court
found this statement to be a clear articulation of the desire to remain silent
and reversed. Judge Thompson wrote the opinion with Dixon concurring and
Caperton dissented (no written dissenting opinion).
Contributed by Renee VandenWallBake
Contributed by Renee VandenWallBake
