A man accused of attempted rape when he was 18 years old is trying to have his conviction and sentence overturned because he was too high on the hallucinogenic drug LSD to knowingly confess to the crime. The Michigan Supreme Court heard arguments on the question Wednesday.
Zebadiah Soriano, who is now 23, wants his involuntary statement suppressed, and he wants a sentence that includes putting his name on the state’s sex offender registry reversed.
Ali Wright of the State Appellate Defender Office argued the influence on the mind of psychotropic drugs like LSD is different than alcohol or marijuana. Wright also said the fact that Soriano, while in the hospital, was held in a chair with restraints was coercive.
But Wright’s central argument was that since his client was still under the influence if the psychotropic drug, he could not understand his Miranda rights against self-incrimination and should not have been asked questions by law enforcement.
“The answer wasn’t don’t Mirandize him,” said Wright. “The kid’s in custody. The answer is just wait. Just wait.”
Grand Traverse County Chief Assistant Prosecutor Kyle Attwood said the conversation between a police officer who took the statement was just a few minutes and initiated by Soriano, who was lucid enough to speak, although he had earlier been behaving in a bizarre fashion and speaking incoherently.
“Officers routinely take statements from suspects once they sober up enough to converse, so adopting that requirement would kind of throw a wrench into what is a workable analysis looking at the totality of the circumstances from an external point of view,” said Attwood.
Justice Noah Hood, a Democratic Party-nominated jurist, questioned whether that was a fair standard.
“If the statement were coming from, say, an informant, could the police rely on it?” he asked. “If an informant were tripping off LSD and handcuffed … restrained in a hospital room, just waking up, could the police rely on that statement?”
The prosecutor said “yes,” but also added that the totality of the evidence favors upholding the conviction.
The Michigan Court of Appeals upheld the conviction in an opinion last year.
