Opinion ID: 2613228
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: April 3 interview

Text: On April 2, Officer Quinn received a phone call from a person identifying himself as Antonin. (Defendant was also known as Antonin Capriano.) Antonin indicated he was confined at the San Mateo County jail and wished to speak to the officer. Officers Quinn and McCarthy visited defendant and again read him his Miranda rights. Defendant again confirmed he understood these rights and wished to talk with the officers. At one point in the interview, the officers asked defendant to tell what happened in regard to Castro and Holmes. Defendant insisted the discussion be off the record, stating that he was not going to incriminate himself by telling what happened. He added that he would plead guilty to manslaughter for two years. After terminating the interview (I don't want to say anything else), he called the officers back and told them to see if the district attorney would go for twenty straight years for the case. According to the Attorney General, and not disputed by defendant's appellate counsel, none of defendant's statements at the April 3 interview was introduced at trial. Accordingly, it is apparent that defendant could not have been prejudiced by any asserted Miranda errors occurring during that interview, and we do not discuss defendant's claims in that regard.