Commonwealth v. Byrd

Apprehended after a police chase, the defendant made unsolicited incriminating statements to the arresting officer. His motion to suppress these statements was denied. At trial the statements were admitted into evidence and a Superior Court jury convicted him of caqacking and other crimes.1 Even *643though the statements were not the product of police interrogation, the defendant contends on appeal that, in determining whether these incriminating remarks were voluntary, the motion judge was required to consider that the defendant made them before being given Miranda warnings,2 particularly in…