Opinion ID: 2334546
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: appellant lindsey's issues on appeal

Text: We first turn to Lindsey's claim that his confession was admitted in violation of his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights. In reviewing the trial court's denial of the motion to suppress, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the prevailing party, and all reasonable inferences therefrom must be viewed in favor of sustaining the trial court ruling. Castellon v. United States, 864 A.2d 141, 148 (D.C.2004) (quoting Gatlin v. United States, 833 A.2d 995, 1005 (D.C.2003)). In addition, we must accept the trial judge's findings of evidentiary fact and [her] resolution of conflicting testimony, but we review legal determinations de novo. Mesa v. United States, 875 A.2d 79, 89 (D.C. 2005) (quoting Brown v. United States, 590 A.2d 1008, 1020 (D.C.1991)).