Opinion ID: 6357541
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Whether Hopkins Validly Waived her Miranda Rights During her Interview With the Detective Sergeant

Text: [¶ 39] If an individual is determined to be in custody, the State then has the burden of proving that the statements were obtained after a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of Miranda rights. State v. Coombs , 1998 ME 1 , ¶ 15, 704 A.2d 387 . To constitute a valid waiver of Miranda rights, a defendant's conduct must amount to an intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right or privilege. State v. Gordon , 387 A.2d 611 , 612 (Me. 1978). Whether a defendant has validly waived her Miranda rights depends on the factual circumstances of the interrogation. Coombs , 1998 ME 1 , ¶ 13, 704 A.2d 387 . [¶ 40] Hopkins was given Miranda warnings at the beginning of her second interview-the interview with the detective sergeant in her kitchen-and validly waived Miranda . After introductory remarks, the detective sergeant informed Hopkins of her Miranda rights and provided her with a written Miranda consent form, which she signed. Although Hopkins was crying at times, she was coherent and understandable for the majority of the interview. The court did not err in concluding, based on the totality of the circumstances, that Hopkins's waiver of her Miranda rights was knowing, voluntary, and intentional.