 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
People v. Goff9/10/2004
A jury convicted defendant David Dean Goff of two counts of each of the following: assault on a child resulting in death (Pen.Code, § 273ab--counts III and IV), [FN1] gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated (§ 191.5, subd. (a)--counts V and VI), and felony child abuse (§ 273a, subd. (a)--counts VII and VIII). In connection with counts VII and VIII, the jury found that defendant willfully caused or permitted a child in his custody to suffer injury resulting in death. (§ 12022.95.) The jury failed to reach a verdict on two counts of murder (§ 187, subd. (a)), and the court declared a mistrial on those counts and dismissed them at sentencing.
FN1. All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.
Sentenced to state prison, defendant appeals, contending the trial court erroneously admitted into evidence his statements to an officer during an interrogation conducted while being transported from the hospital to the jail; he argues his statements were obtained in violation of Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 [16 L.Ed.2d 694] (Miranda ). We will affirm the judgment.
FACTS
About 6:30 p.m. on January 6, 2002, defendant drove his truck off the road and crashed into a tree, killing his two young daughters instantly. A half-empty bottle of vodka was found in the truck. While being evaluated in preparation for the helicopter flight to the hospital, defendant told a flight nurse he had been drinking beer.
At the hospital, defendant claimed he remembered nothing. His blood alcohol content was .33 percent.
On January 12, 2002, defendant was released from the hospital, arrested, and transported to the jail, during which transport California Highway Patrol Sergeant Brian Nicholson conducted a tape-recorded interview. Defendant explained that on two prior occasions in the previous week he had tried to commit suicide. He did not want his estranged wife, Katina Goff, to have the girls and admitted trying to kill himself and the girls by crashing into the tree.
Katina explained that she and defendant separated in December 2000. The girls lived with her but defendant had them every other weekend. Defendant's drinking became an issue and Katina obtained a court order requiring him to attend classes about alcoholism. In mid-December 2001 defendant told her he had taken pills in an attempt to kill himself. While Katina recovered from surgery in January 2002, defendant watched the girls.
Defendant testified he did not recall the accident, his stay in the hospital, or his interview with Sergeant Nicholson. Defendant denied ever having attempted suicide and could not recall telling anyone that he had. He claimed he did not intentionally kill his girls. He had two convictions for drunk driving, the most recent in 1997.
DISCUSSION
Defendant contends that his statements during Sergeant Nicholson's interrogation were erroneously admitted in that he was in custody before Nicholson arrested him on January 12, his statements on January 12 were not knowing and voluntary, and no express waiver of his rights pursuant to Miranda was ever sought. We conclude that defendant's statements were properly admitted into evidence.
Background
*2 The prosecution filed a pretrial motion seeking admission of defendant's statements made on January 11 and 12, 2002. Defendant opposed the motion. At the hearing on the motion, California Highway Patrol Officer Rowell Del Rosario testified that he contacted defendant at the hospital on January 6, 2002, to investigate a possible driving under the influence offense. Observing defendant's symptoms of intoxication, Del Rosario advised defendant that he was under arrest for driving under the influence and that a blood sample would be taken. After the sample was drawn, Del Rosario advised defendant he w
Page 1 2 3 4 5 California DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|