State v. Hemphill

HUNTER, Robert C., Judge,

concurring in result.

I concur with the majority that Defendant is not entitled to a new trial based on a violation of his Miranda rights. However, I disagree with the majority’s conclusion that Defendant was in custody at the time Officer Adkins asked Defendant why he was running. Because I conclude Defendant was not in custody, he was not subject to custodial interrogation, and was not entitled to a Miranda warning at the time he stated that he tried “to break[] into the business.” Accordingly, I would affirm the trial court’s denial of Defendant’s Motion to Suppress.