Case Title: Vasquez v. State

Citation: 254 Ind. 472, 260 N.E.2d 779

Docket Number: 768S110

State: indiana

Court: Indiana Supreme Court

Date: 1970-07-30T00:00:00Z

Document:
254 Ind. 472 (1970)
260 N.E.2d 779
VASQUEZ
v.
STATE OF INDIANA.
No. 768S110.

Supreme Court of Indiana.
Filed July 30, 1970.
Rehearing denied September 23, 1970.
*473 Norbert L. Wyss, Kenneth M. Waterman, of Fort Wayne, for appellant.
Theodore L. Sendak, Attorney General, John J. Dillon, Former Attorney General, Robert F. Hassett, Deputy Attorney General, for appellee.
ARTERBURN, J.
This is an appeal from a conviction of rape. The appellant's assignment of error avers that the trial court erred in overruling his motion for a new trial. In particular it is argued that certain evidence introduced at trial was erroneously admitted over appellant's objection that he was not fully advised of his constitutional rights prior to being questioned by the police.
The crux of appellant's argument concerns the following objection and ruling by the trial court made during the direct examination of one of the police officers:
At one other point during the course of the trial the appellant had reason to make an objection similar to the above. This occurred when the other police officer who was present during the interrogation of the appellant testified as to the conversation. As substantially the same matters were related and questions raised, we need not burden this opinion with this latter testimony, objection, and ruling.
Appellant argues that he was never clearly advised that he could have counsel present with him during the interrogation. The State argues that it is apparent that while appellant was not told he could have an attorney "present during the interrogation," he was at the same time told that he did not have to answer any questions. That information covered the situation adequately.
Be that as it may, and regardless of such contentions, we believe there exists another reason why appellant's position is *476 without merit. The statements made by the appellant were in substance that on the night in question he was at a bar until 11:30 p.m. and then went home. Further, appellant stated during the interrogation that he was wearing a dark pair of pants, a plaid sport jacket, and a black shirt with gold polka dots.
Thus, the statements made by the appellant were very general in nature. They were not confessions. In addition, the appellant, on direct examination, testified as to the same facts adduced during the police interrogation.
Not only did the appellant testify to the same facts contained in the statement of the police officers, not refuting any of them, but also two other defense witnesses, namely, appellant's landlord and the landlord's wife, testified to the same facts relative to the clothing worn and where the appellant was during the night in question. We thus conclude that the admission of the questioned statements made to the police officers, at the most, from appellant's point of view, constitutes harmless error. Greer v. State (1969), 252 Ind. 20, 245 N.E.2d 158; MacGregor v. State (1967), 249 Ind. 195, 231 N.E.2d 241.
For the above reason, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Hunter, C.J., Givan and DeBruler, JJ., concur. Jackson, J., dissents with opinion.
JACKSON, J.
I am unable to concur in the majority opinion and dissent thereto. It is my opinion that appellant was not adequately advised of his constitutional rights as specified in the case of Miranda v. Arizona (1966), 384 U.S. 436, 86 *478 S. Ct. 1602, 16 L. Ed. 2d 694. The United States Supreme Court in Miranda stated:
Appellant was not advised that he could have an attorney present during the interrogation, therefore, he was not adequately advised of his constitutional rights. Accordingly, the lower court erred in admitting into evidence appellant's statements given to the officers during interrogation.
The judgment of the trial court should be reversed and the cause remanded with instructions to sustain appellant's motion for new trial.
NOTE.  Reported in 260 N.E.2d 779.