Opinion ID: 1841427
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Williams's Miranda rights claim

Text: ¶ 29. Williams claims that he was questioned by Agent Umfress prior to being informed of his constitutional rights as required by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). This argument is presented for the first time on appeal. No motion was made at the trial level to suppress the statements made by Williams to the agents at his home. Agent Umfress testified that he orally advised Williams of his rights during the execution of the search warrant. Further, Williams signed a waiver of his rights after being taken into custody. As a general rule, constitutional questions not asserted at the trial level are deemed waived. Pinkney v. State, 757 So.2d 297, 299 (Miss.2000). This issue is procedurally barred.