State v. Miller

Summary

The Oregon Supreme Court affirmed the denial of a defendant’s motions to suppress statements made to police in a hospital emergency room and the results of a subsequent blood draw. The court held that the questioning did not occur under compelling circumstances requiring Miranda protections under Article I, section 12, that the defendant’s statements were voluntary, and that she voluntarily consented to the blood draw under Article I, section 9.

Holdings

1. The interrogation in the hospital emergency-room hallway did not occur under compelling circumstances. Because defendant was not in custody or otherwise subject to compelling circumstances, Article I, section 12, did not require Miranda warnings or a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of the rights described in those warnings.
2. Defendant's statements were voluntary under Article I, section 12, despite her intoxication, head injury, and the possible effects of Fentanyl.
3. Defendant voluntarily consented to the second blood draw under the totality of the circumstances, so the consent exception to the warrant requirement applied.

Questions Presented

1. Whether defendant's statements to Officer Mount in the hospital emergency-room hallway were obtained under compelling circumstances requiring Miranda warnings and a knowing and voluntary waiver under Article I, section 12, of the Oregon Constitution.
2. Whether defendant's statements were voluntary despite her intoxication, head injury, and the possible effects of Fentanyl.
3. Whether defendant voluntarily consented to the warrantless blood draw under Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution.
4. Whether the officer's conclusory testimony about defendant's agreement to the blood draw was sufficient to establish voluntary consent.

Disposition

affirmed