In re D.W.

Summary

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals affirmed juvenile adjudications for kidnapping, attempted first-degree child sexual abuse, and two counts of second-degree child sexual abuse. The court held that the juvenile was not in custody during an initial police encounter, validly waived Miranda rights before a later interview, and could not establish a prohibited two-step interrogation. The court also rejected challenges to the specificity of the kidnapping petition, merger of the kidnapping and sexual-abuse offenses, and amendment of the petition.

Holdings

1. D.W. was not in custody for Miranda purposes when Officer Farris briefly questioned him, so the absence of Miranda warnings did not require suppression of his statements.
2. The trial court properly admitted D.W.'s post-warning statements because substantial evidence supported a finding that he knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his Miranda rights.
3. D.W. was not entitled to suppression under Seibert because the initial questioning was noncustodial and therefore did not violate Miranda.
4. The juvenile petition adequately charged kidnapping because the statutory language, together with the factual context alleged in the other counts, apprised D.W. of the conduct at issue and protected against subsequent prosecution for the same conduct.
5. The kidnapping and child sexual abuse findings did not merge because each offense requires proof of a fact that the other does not, and no clear legislative intent required merger.
6. The trial court properly permitted amendment of the petition from sexual contact with the victim's buttocks to sexual contact with her breasts because the amendment did not charge a new offense and did not prejudice D.W.'s ability to defend.
7. The evidence was sufficient to support the finding that D.W. attempted first-degree child sexual abuse.

Questions Presented

1. Whether D.W. was subjected to custodial interrogation requiring Miranda warnings when Officer Farris briefly questioned him in an upstairs bedroom.
2. Whether D.W. knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his Miranda rights before questioning by Detective Bookard.
3. Whether the later interview violated Missouri v. Seibert's prohibition on deliberate question-first interrogation.
4. Whether the kidnapping count in the juvenile petition was insufficiently specific because it did not identify the particular purpose or manner of seizure.
5. Whether the kidnapping and child sexual abuse findings arising from the June 2005 incident merged under double-jeopardy principles.
6. Whether the trial court properly permitted amendment of the juvenile petition to change the alleged 2003 sexual contact from the buttocks to the breasts.
7. Whether the evidence was sufficient to support a finding of attempted first-degree child sexual abuse.

Disposition

affirmed