Opinion ID: 1095355
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 12

Heading: did the trial court err in admitting statements made by the defendant which were secured in violation of the defendant's right against self-incrimination?

Text: Under this final assignment of error, Griffin argues that the trial court improperly admitted certain statements that he had made while being transported to Hinds County because those statements were obtained after he invoked his right against self-incrimination. The statements complained of concern Griffin's purchase of a gun prior to the date of the murders. Subsequently, the gun was identified as the murder weapon. Griffin concedes that the officers re-read him his Miranda rights on the way to Hinds County. However, he contends that the State failed to prove a knowing and intelligent waiver of those rights so as to make the admission of the statements permissible. In Jones v. State, 461 So.2d 686 (Miss. 1984), we recognize that once a criminal defendant invokes his right against self-incrimination, regardless of the manner or language he utilizes, police interrogation must cease immediately and the accused's rights are to be scrupulously honored. Jones, 461 So.2d at 699. Thereafter, law enforcement officials may not resume interrogation unless: 1. There has been an adequate cooling off period; 2. There is a reasonable basis for inferring that the suspect has voluntarily changed his mind; 3. New and adequate Miranda warnings are given. Jones, 461 So.2d at 699, 700. The State has the burden of proving that these requirements have been met before a subsequent statement can be properly admitted into evidence. Id. Apparently, Griffin indicated that he wished for the initial interrogation to cease while he was in custody in Vicksburg. However, subsequent interrogation occurred over an hour after he was initially read his Miranda rights. Further, there is no dispute that Griffin was re-read his Miranda rights enroute to Hinds County. Finally, Sheriff J.W. Stevens testified that he personally re-read the Miranda warnings to Griffin and that Griffin acknowledged that he understood those rights prior to making any statements. Applying the guidelines set forth in Jones to the instant case, we hold that that State met its burden and therefore, the trial court properly admitted the statements at trial. Finding no prejudicial error either at the competency hearing or at the trial on the merits, we affirm both the determination that Griffin was competent to stand trial and the subsequent conviction and life sentence for the murder of Maxine Lewis. COMPETENCY DETERMINATION AFFIRMED. CONVICTION OF MURDER AND SENTENCE OF LIFE IMPRISONMENT AFFIRMED. WALKER, C.J., ROY NOBLE LEE and HAWKINS, P.JJ., and DAN M. LEE, PRATHER, ROBERTSON, ANDERSON and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.