Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility


Appellant, Warren Jackson, was convicted by a jury in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland, of possession of a regulated firearm after conviction of a disqualifying crime, wearing, carrying or transporting a handgun on one’s person, discharging a gun within Baltimore City limits, and theft of property valued under $1,000. He was sentenced to 15 years on the felon in possession count, the first five without parole; one year consecutive suspended for the discharge of a firearm count; 90 days consecutive suspended for theft; and five years supervised probation upon release.

Appellant timely appealed and presents the following question for our review:

Did the court err in denying appellant’s motion to suppress his statement?

Appellant contends that the motions court erred because he was subject to the functional equivalent of interrogation without the benefit of having been read his rights pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). The State disagrees, responding that the police officer could not reasonably have known, or should have known, that his statements were likely to elicit an incriminating response.

Read the unreported opinion.