Page 547
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 548
APPEAL
FROM THE FRANKLIN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, NORTHERN DISTRICT
[NO. 24OCR-17-151], HONORABLE WILLIAM PEARSON, JUDGE
Omar F.
Greene, for appellant.
Leslie
Rutledge, Atty Gen., by: Chris R. Warthen, Asst Atty Gen.,
for appellee.
OPINION
N. MARK
KLAPPENBACH, Judge
Appellant John Paul Lovett was convicted by a jury in the
Franklin County Circuit Court of aggravated residential
burglary with a firearm enhancement, second-degree battery,
and theft of property. He was sentenced as a habitual
offender to a total of fifty-five years imprisonment. Before
trial, the circuit court denied appellants motion to
suppress his statement made to law enforcement officers.
Appellant now argues on appeal that the circuit court erred
in denying his motion to suppress due to his vulnerability to
police promises of leniency. We affirm.
In his
motion to suppress, appellant alleged that his statement was
not made freely, voluntarily, and knowingly because the
officers told him that they would get him mental-health
treatment, drug-rehabilitation treatment, and a brief prison
sentence if he provided a truthful statement. He claimed that
he would not have given a statement without these
representations. Chief Deputy Jeff Wood of the Franklin
County Sheriffs Office was the only witness to testify at
the suppression hearing. Wood testified that he, along with
Franklin County Sheriff Anthony Boen, interviewed appellant
on July 3, 2017, about an incident that had occurred on May
27. Appellant had previously declined to give a statement to
officers, but Wood had subsequently spoken with appellants
girlfriend, Kimberly Munholland, who indicated that appellant
now wanted to talk. Munholland told Wood that appellant
needed mental-health treatment and drug rehabilitation, and
she wanted Wood to recommend it; Wood said that he agreed
with her.
Appellant was detained on other charges in a different county
at the time of the interview. The transcript of the recorded
interview was admitted into evidence. At the beginning of the
interview, Wood told appellant about his conversation with
Munholland. Appellant said that Munholland had told him that
"she made a statement and that she wanted me to go ahead
and do the same." Wood then said that
[w]e talked about getting you or recommending getting you
into a mental facility. She said thats what you would want
or need. Thats really more than what you need than prison,
and I told her that I wouldnt have a problem recommending
that. I cant make you promises, but I can recommend that to
the prosecutor, okay?
Page 549
Sheriff Boen then stated, "You know Ill go to bat for
you." Appellant did not respond to these statements.
After explaining what they wanted to talk about, Wood advised
appellant of his Miranda rights, and appellant
signed a waiver of those rights. Appellant then described how
he and an accomplice had broken into a mans house to rob him
of his pills and how he had hit the man and stolen his gun.
At the end of the interview, appellant asked whether the
prosecutor would be interested in helping him and what the
options may be. The officers told him that the prosecutor and
the defense attorney could negotiate a plea deal and take the
officers recommendation into consideration.
Wood
testified that he made a written recommendation to the State
for appellant to receive "rehabilitation and mental
help" as reflected by a signed document admitted into
evidence. Wood said that at the time of the interview,
appellant did not appear to be under the influence of drugs
or alcohol or impaired in any way, that he was thirty-two
years old, that he has a GED, and that he has an extensive
...