Court Opinion

ID: 9888841
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-06 19:56:38.167367+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:32:38.414649
License: Public Domain

Stegall, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part:
I would affirm the lower courts' decisions to allow Guein's pre- Miranda statements into evidence. As such, I dissent from the portion of today's decision ordering the suppression of that evidence. In my view, the Court of Appeals correctly applied the Lewis factors and concluded that "this portion of the encounter was much like a traffic stop, ordinarily considered an investigatory detention not requiring Miranda warnings." State v. Guein , 53 Kan. App. 2d 394, 405, 388 P.3d 194 (2017) ; see State v. Lewis , 299 Kan. 828, 835, 326 P.3d 387 (2014) (listing eight "[f]actors to consider in determining if an interrogation is investigative or custodial").
I agree, however, with the majority that Guein's post- Miranda statements were not voluntary and must be suppressed. Though I do not find the use of profanity nearly as significant as the majority does. The majority relies heavily on the use of the word "fuck" to reach its conclusion, going so far as to hold that "in this context a reasonable person would associate such profanity with violence." Op. at 353. I disagree. Indeed, the ubiquity of profanity-the word "fuck" in particular-has effectively sapped its once vaunted ability to shock, frighten, or offend. See Dunn, On Cussing: Bad Words and Creative Cursing 17 (2019) (lamenting the "potent word being drained of all its juice and snap by overuse"); McWhorter, Swearing In , The New Republic, March 22, 2011, https://newrepublic.com/article/85504/curse-words-pop-music-cee-lo (explaining that "in real language, yesterday's hot stuff **1266is always today's papier-mache. Hence language change is not only a matter of people giving up prithee and forsooth , but one of The New Yorker printing shit and ordinary people texting WTF 24/7"); see also Fairman, Fuck , 28 Cardozo L. Rev. 1711, 1720 (2007) (describing the ubiquity of the word: "One recent Internet search revealed that fuck 'is a more commonly used word than mom, baseball, hot dogs, apple pie, and Chevrolet.'").
Simply put, in my judgment, law enforcement's use of the word "fuck" does not make the circumstance more or less coercive. Guein was not coerced because of his tender ears, but because of a real and actionable threat. And the practical problem with the majority's reasoning is that it suggests a politely worded threat is less coercive than a vulgar one.
Biles, J., joins in the foregoing concurring and dissenting opinion.