State Ex Rel. R.A.

MEMORANDUM DECISION

McHUGH, Associate Presiding Judge:

T1 R.A. appeals his convictions for various drug-related charges.1 R.A. claims that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress the evidence because the evidence was obtained in violation of his constitutional rights. We affirm.

T2 R.A. argues that the State violated his privilege against self-incrimination, see U.S. Const. amend. V,2 when the police officer investigating the incident questioned RA. without first giving him the warnings required by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). In…