Incrimination During ''Casual Conversation'' With a Police Officer

In People v. Mobley (1999) 72 Cal. App. 4th 761, 791 85 Cal. Rptr. 2d 474, the reviewing court rejected a contention that a police officer's "attempt at casual conversation" with a suspect who was being transported to jail following his request to see an attorney constituted interrogation. The court found that the officers' statements were neither direct interrogation nor its functional equivalent that was likely to elicit an incriminating response. (Id. at p. 792.) The court concluded that the prohibition on renewed interrogation announced in Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. at pages 484-485 101 S. Ct. at pages 1884-1885, applies only when there is interrogation, and that statements that are not the product of interrogation are not violative of Miranda principles. (People v. Mobley, supra, 72 Cal. App. 4th at p. 792.)