Court Opinion

ID: 9738919
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 20:05:19.003236+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:09.242638
License: Public Domain

SCHLEGEL, Judge
(dissenting).
I must respectfully dissent to a portion of the majority opinion in this case.
First, to hold that because there is “some evidence” of the violations, while the proper test of our rule to uphold the finding of violation of prison rules, it would be helpful to set out what evidence is sufficient to render the improper use of Bradley’s refusal to submit to a lie detector test harmless. The raw statement of the majority that the existence of some other evidence (without some explanation) renders it harmless leaves us without any rule by which to measure its effect. It may well be that the reference to that refusal caused no prejudice in view of the evidence in the record. If so, we should explain why.
Perhaps of a more serious nature, the majority, for all its explanation, seeks to find that a warning of a prisoner’s rights is not necessary. To me, to determine that one being imprisoned is not “in custody” is ludicrous. Miranda was designed not to make life difficult for police and security officials. It was based upon the fact that all people have a right against self-incrimination and that they may give up that right if they are appropriately warned. Those rights apply to a prisoner in a jail or penitentiary. I cannot agree that to extend the Miranda warnings to prisoners by a per se rule would extend to them a greater right than is extended to those who are not prisoners. If a routine requirement of the assurance of the rights existed, it would only produce a set procedure that all involved would understand.
If there are no criminal charges anticipated from this interrogation, then we should not be pronouncing a rule which is, for the purposes of this case, unnecessary. We should be careful in our effort to distinguish Mathis.
I believe that this case can be affirmed on different grounds. On the basis of the majority opinion, however, I can but dissent.
SACKETT, J., joins this dissent.