State v. Schroeder

OPINION

DAVIES, Judge.

Appellant Edwin George Schroeder challenges his conviction on the ground that his incriminating statements should have been suppressed because the arresting officers violated the Scales requirement that custodial interrogation be recorded. We affirm.

FACTS

Appellant was arrested for assisting in a burglary. Immediately after his arrest, he was placed in a police squad ear and read his Miranda rights. Appellant did not assert those rights and, in response to statements made by the arresting officer, made several incriminating statements. Neither appel*740lant’s nor the officer’s…