People in the Interest of Z.T.T

¶1 This interlocutory appeal requires us to answer whether a defendant’s confession to an Army investigator during basic training was the product of coercion. We hold that, when a defendant knowingly and intelligently waived, his Miranda rights, knew he was free to leave an interview, and confessed to committing a crime during the course of a conversational, friendly interview devoid of coercive promises or threats, he gave his statements voluntarily. We therefore reverse the trial court’s suppression order and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

I. Facts and Procedural History