Exchanging text messages did not require Miranda warnings because nobody was “in custody.”
State v. James (HSC January 3, 2024) Background. After interviewing a complaining witness, detectives at the Kauai Police Department suspected Dylan James committed sexual assault. The police had the CW contact James to talk about it. The CW tried calling twice and James did not pick up. Then the CW texted him. In the text messages, James admitted to having “rough” sex and texted that “when you were screaming and crawling away from the lifeguard tower . . . couldn[‘]t tell if you were serious[.]” James was indicted with five counts of sexual assault in the first degree. James filed a motion to suppress his statements in the text messages on the grounds that the police used the CW as an agent and failed to apprise James of his constitutional right to remain silent and his right to counsel. The circuit court, with the Hon. Judge Randal Valenciano presiding, granted the motion. The circuit court found that James was “in custody” for Miranda purposes because probable ca...