State v. Nixon
| Decision Date | 26 March 2013 |
| Docket Number | No. DA 11–0733.,DA 11–0733. |
| Citation | 369 Mont. 359,298 P.3d 408 |
| Parties | STATE of Montana, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Jeffrey Allen NIXON, Defendant and Appellant. |
| Court | Montana Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
For Appellant: Colin M. Stephens, Smith & Stephens, P.C.; Missoula, Montana.
For Appellee: Timothy C. Fox, Montana Attorney General; Pamela P. Collins, Assistant Attorney General; Helena, Montana, Ed Corrigan, Flathead County Attorney; Alison Howard, Lori Adams, Deputy County Attorneys; Kalispell, Montana.
[369 Mont. 360]¶ 1 Following a five-day trial in July 2011, a jury convicted Jeffrey Allen Nixon of accountability for deliberate homicide, robbery, tampering with physical evidence, and burglary—all felonies. Nixon appeals his conviction on the ground that the Montana Eleventh Judicial District Court, Flathead County, erred in denying his motion to suppress statements he made during a custodial interrogation. We affirm.
¶ 2 On April 17, 2010, Sergeant Jim Wardensky of the Kalispell Police Department responded to a report from Wesley Collins's landlord that his apartment had been burglarized. Police had been to the apartment the day before for a requested welfare check on Collins and had not found him. While Wardensky was investigating the break-in, by-standers told additional responding officers that two individuals were running out the back window of Collins's apartment. One officer chased the individuals and apprehended Robert Lake, who was taken into custody for questioning. Although Lake initially blamed Nixon for Collins's disappearance, within hours, Lake “had admitted to killing Mr. Collins and putting his body up in the Patrick Creek area.” Lake made statements further implicating Nixon in the homicide and proceeded to show Wardensky where Collins's body was located.
¶ 3 In the early hours of April 18, Nixon's father was driving Nixon home from his older brother's bachelor party. During the party, which lasted approximately seven hours, Nixon estimated he consumed about ten drinks. On their way home, Nixon and his father were stopped by four law enforcement officers who, with weapons drawn, detained the two and then transported Nixon to the Kalispell Police Station for questioning.1 An arresting officer informed Nixon during transport that he had been arrested on two outstanding misdemeanor warrants; he was not informed that he was the subject of a homicide investigation.
¶ 4 Nixon arrived at the police station at 4:30 a.m. and was given a copy of his outstanding warrants. All movements and statements he made at the station were videotaped by Kalispell police. At first, Nixon was left alone in the booking area of the station for approximately two hours, during which time he slept on a bench. Just prior to 7:00 a.m., Sergeant Wardensky woke Nixon up and began to interview him. Wardensky asked Nixon if he had been drinking; Nixon admitted that he had had “quite a bit” to drink. Wanting to ensure that Nixon was not incapacitated, Wardensky asked Nixon to provide a breath sample on a portable breath testing device. The test showed Nixon's blood alcohol content to be .08. Wardensky then told Nixon that what he would like to do is “visit with you a little bit about something that I've been looking at and working on, starting yesterday morning I guess.” First, however, Wardensky asked Nixon a series of general questions about where he lived, the bachelor party he had attended, and his brother's impending wedding.
¶ 5 Wardensky then read Nixon his rights pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), as provided on the Kalispell Police Department's “YOUR RIGHTS” form. The following dialogue occurred immediately after Wardensky read Nixon his rights:
¶ 6 After Nixon read and signed the statement identifying his Miranda rights, signaling that he understood those rights and was willing to talk to law enforcement, Wardensky began to ask him general questions about Robert Lake and Wesley Collins. Although initially Nixon stated that he had had limited contact with Collins, eventually he explained that he had smoked marijuana with Collins on several occasions. Wardensky then informed Nixon that the Kalispell Police Department had received a missing person's report regarding Collins. Nixon did not invoke his right to remain silent at that point, and instead answered Wardensky's questions about when he last had seen Collins. Wardensky then “cut to the chase,” told Nixon he knew “Wes is dead” and informed Nixon that he was conducting a homicide investigation. Nixon did not invoke his right to remain silent at that point, but continued to answer Wardensky's questions about the events surrounding Collins's death.
¶ 7 On April 22, 2010, the Flathead County Attorney filed an information charging Nixon with causing the death of Wesley Collins. The county attorney later filed an amended information charging Nixon with the following felony offenses: (1) Accountability for Deliberate Homicide in violation of §§ 45–2–302(3) and 45–5–102(1)(a), MCA, and, in the alternative, Deliberate Homicide, in violation of § 45–5–102(1)(b), MCA; (2) Robbery, in violation of § 45–5–401(1)(a), MCA; (3) Tampering with Physical Evidence, in violation of § 45–7–207(1)(a), MCA; and (4) Burglary, in violation of § 45–6–204(1)(b), MCA.
¶ 8 Nixon filed a motion to suppress statements he made during his interview with Sergeant Wardensky. The District Court held a hearing on the matter on September 17, 2010. Both Nixon and Wardensky testified. The court viewed portions of the videotaped interview and admitted several pages of a transcript of the interview into evidence. Nixon also testified; he stated that he understood his Miranda rights during the interview and acknowledged that he never specifically told Wardensky that he did not want to talk to him, although he did say that he did not really have anything to talk about. After the hearing, the District Court denied Nixon's motion to suppress. The court found that Nixon voluntarily agreed to answer Wardensky's questions and further concluded that Nixon “did not unambiguously invoke his right to remain silent and in fact, when he directs the officer to ‘talk away’ he appears to be agreeing to answer questions.”
¶ 9 Nixon's trial began on July 11, 2011. Several of Nixon's acquaintances testified against him, including some who had been charged in connection with Collins's death. Nixon also testified on his own behalf. The trial testimony established that Collins lived upstairs from Lake and his girlfriend and that Nixon, Lake and Collins had smoked marijuana together on occasion. Testimony showed that, on April 12, 2010, Collins invited Nixon and Lake into his apartment to smoke marijuana. While they were smoking, Lake knocked Collins unconscious by striking him in the head with a claw hammer. Lake then told Nixon to shut the blinds in the apartment and check whether Collins's marijuana plants were budding; Nixon followed Lake's directions. When Collins began to regain consciousness, Lake responded by striking him with another hammer and eventually proceeding to strangle him with string.
¶ 10 After Collins was dead, Nixon left the apartment to purchase cigarettes at a nearby gas station. He acknowledged at trial that he could have called the police at this point, but he chose not to. Instead, he returned to the apartment complex and played an integral role in disposing of Collins's body.
¶ 11 Nixon told Lake that they should dump Collins's body at Patrick Creek, a remote area in the mountains. Nixon borrowed a truck from a friend to transport the body. Then he, Lake, and Lake's friend wrapped Collins's body in blankets and threw it out the window. Nixon drove the truck to the back of the apartment and the trio loaded Collins's body into the truck bed. Nixon drove to Patrick Creek, where they dumped the body. The next morning, Nixon attempted to drive back to Patrick Creek to pour lye on Collins's body, but he was unable to reach the body because it had snowed that night.
¶ 12 The State did not introduce the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Purcell
...State v. Morris , 255 Kan. 964, 981, 880 P.2d 1244 (1994) ; Franklin v. State , 170 So.3d 481, 491 (Miss. 2015) ; State v. Nixon , 369 Mont. 359, 368–69, 298 P.3d 408 (2013) ; State v. Perry , 146 N.M. 208, 217, 207 P.3d 1185 (App. 2009) ; State v. Saylor , 117 S.W.3d 239, 245–46 (Tenn. 200......
- State v. Jay
-
State v. Kelm
...erroneous and whether the court correctly interpreted the law and applied it to those facts.” State v. Nixon, 2013 MT 81, ¶ 15, 369 Mont. 359, 298 P.3d 408 (quoting State v. Haldane, 2013 MT 32, ¶ 15, 368 Mont. 396, 300 P.3d 657). A factual finding is clearly erroneous if it is “not support......
-
Williams v. State
...not a clear, unambiguous assertion of his right to remain silent cannot be disturbed by this court.Id. at 1197.In State v. Nixon, 369 Mont. 359, 298 P.3d 408, 415 (2013), Nixon stating repeatedly during his interview with police, "There isn't really anything to talk about", was held to be a......