Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Pyles

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

April 4, 2014

The State of New Hampshire
v.
David Pyles

Argued: November 7, 2013.

Rockingham.

Joseph A. Foster, attorney general ( Nicholas Cort, assistant attorney general, on the brief and orally), for the State.

Thomas Barnard, assistant appellate defender, of Concord, on the brief and orally, for the defendant.

HICKS, J. DALIANIS, C.J., and CONBOY, LYNN and BASSETT, JJ., concurred.

OPINION

Page 1229

[166 N.H. 167] Hicks, J.

The defendant, David Pyles, appeals his convictions, following a jury trial in Superior Court ( McHugh, J.), on three counts of pattern aggravated felonious sexual assault, see RSA 632-A:2, III (2007), arguing that the Trial Court ( Mohl, J.) erred in denying his motion to suppress statements allegedly obtained in violation of his Miranda rights. See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). We affirm.

We recite the facts as stated in the trial court's order on the motion to suppress or as supported by the record. On January 14, 2010, Detective Michael Bernard of the Salem Police Department called the defendant and requested that he come to the police station to talk about allegations of sexual abuse that had been made against him. The defendant complied. Once at the police station, the defendant was taken into an interview room where he was joined by Salem Police Detective Mark Donohue and Bernard. Bernard informed the defendant that the interview was being recorded and began reading him his Miranda rights from a standard form. After reading all of the rights provisions, the detective neglected to read the final provision regarding waiver of those rights. That provision stated: " HOWEVER You may waive the right to advice of counsel and your right to remain silent and answer questions or make a statement without [166 N.H. 168] consulting a lawyer if you so desire." (Quotation omitted.) Instead, Bernard stated: " [B]asically what this is a waiver that I need you to sign in order for me to talk to you."

The defendant asked if he was being arrested, and Donahue replied that he was. The defendant inquired about the charges against him and claimed that he did not know what was going on. He also expressed concern about losing his job.

Page 1230

Donahue told the defendant that he would have to sign the waiver form if he wished to speak with the detectives. After informing the defendant he was charged with aggravated felonious sexual assault, Bernard stated that he and Donahue wanted to discuss the charges with him " to get [his] side of the story." Donahue then advised the defendant that if he " were going to try to help [him]self, this is probably the right time to do it."

The defendant again said he had no idea what the allegations against him were. Bernard stated that the detectives could not " really get into that," at which point Donahue added " unless you want to talk about it." Donahue also reminded the defendant, however, that he could " stop at any time."

After an inquiry about bail, the defendant commented on the gravity of the charge against him. Donahue again stated that it would be a good time for the defendant to " help [him]self." The defendant stated he would sign the waiver " for now" and did so. Bernard asked the defendant if he understood everything that had been read to him, to which the defendant responded, " Yeah." Bernard ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.