State v. Etienne

Although I concur in the result reached by the majority, I respectfully disagree with the analysis of the claim with regard to the motion to suppress. Specifically, I do not agree that the defendant, Ricardo Etienne, was entitled to Miranda1 warnings prior to being asked his name during the booking process at police headquarters. The majority concludes that “[t]he defendant’s fifth amendment right against self-incrimination demanded that he receive Miranda warnings prior to that inquiry.” The majority reasons that the question as to the defendant’s name did not fall within the routine booking…