# People v. Boyette

> California Court of Appeal · May 26, 1988 · 201 Cal. App. 3d 1527

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5662645

## Case

- **Full name:** THE PEOPLE, and v. STEVEN ANDREW BOYETTE, and
- **Court:** California Court of Appeal
- **Decided:** May 26, 1988
- **Citations:** 201 Cal. App. 3d 1527; 247 Cal. Rptr. 795; 1988 Cal. App. LEXIS 551
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Brauer
- **Judges:** Agliano, Brauer
- **Cited by:** 16 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Yellow flag:** Declined to follow by In Re Daniel CH, 220 Cal. App. 3d 814 (1990).
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5662645

## Opinion text

BRAUER, J., Concurring.
When the trial court found the defendant’s statement “voluntary,” it obviously used that word in the sense of “volunteered.” Voluntariness, as contradistinguished from duress, was never in issue. The trial court’s finding was amply supported by the evidence; and as the Miranda decision itself makes clear, volunteered statements of any kind are not barred by the Fifth Amendment. (Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 at p. 478 [ 16 L.Ed.2d 694, 726 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 10 A.L.R.3d 974 ].) I believe that the defendant’s statement should be discussed in that context rather than under the heading of Miranda waiver.
In all other respects, I agree with the opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5662645. Public record. Not legal advice.