PEOPLE v. TATE Part-IV

PEOPLE v. TATE



















Filed 7/8/10











IN THE SUPREME
COURT OF CALIFORNIA







THE PEOPLE, )

)

Plaintiff
and Respondent, )

) S031641

v. )

)

GREGORY O. TATE, )

) Alameda
County

Defendant
and Appellant. ) Super.
Ct. No. 93308

__________________________________ )







Story continued from part III…..

C. Guilt phase
issues.

1. Admission of defendant's statements in
police custody.

Defendant
urges the trial court erred by declining to suppress his statements made in
police custody, both to the investigating officers and to Lisa Henry. As discussed below, he insists his >Miranda waivers were not knowing and
intelligent waivers of his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination
because (1) the officers prejudicially misled him about the scope of their
interrogation, and (2) Henry was acting, without his knowledge, as a police
agent. These contentions lack merit.

The following
facts disclosed at the in limine suppression hearing
(Evid. Code, § 402) are essentially
undisputed: Following his arrest on April 19, 1988, defendant was brought
to the Oakland Police Department's homicide division. There he was questioned by Sergeants Paniagua and Medsker. At the outset of an initial, unrecorded,
session, the officers stated they were investigating the car defendant had been
driving, because the car was stolen and a lady had been â€