Peterson v. Douma

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s habeas petition challenging his sexual assault of child conviction on grounds that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to file motion to suppress inculpatory statement that defendant made to off-duty police officer where: (1) ten-year-old victim told off-duty officer, who was at victim’s house as Big Brother, Big Sister volunteer, that defendant had sexually abused him; (2) officer confronted defendant, who was also at victim’s house, with victim’s accusation; and (3) defendant merely refuted alleged time frame of said abuse. While defendant argued that said statement would have been suppressed if counsel had filed motion to suppress since he was in police custody at time he made statement, state court could reasonably conclude that defendant was not in custody at time he gave statement, and thus any motion to suppress would have been denied since: (1) officer was not in uniform and was off-duty at time statement was made; and (2) officer did not display badge, draw weapon or take any action indicating that officer was acting in her role as officer, as opposed to private citizen at time she confronted defendant with victim’s accusation. Fact that defendant was aware that said volunteer was police officer at time he gave statement, or that officer told defendant not to leave after he gave said statement did not require different result.