McRoy v. State

OPINION

Convicted by jury of armed robbery, Freddie Gene McRoy contends we must reverse because the trial court erred in (1) admitting inculpatory statements; (2) failing to sever his trial from that of a codefendant; and, (3) refusing to give a requested instruction. We disagree.

1. The record negates McRoy’s claim that the inculpatory statements he gave to police were coerced and taken in violation of rights afforded by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). Here, the trial judge, in the absence of the jury, received evidence on the issue and found McRoy had been fully advised of his…