ÿWPCÏ ¬•/ÇÕ×ê‡eM…® e0­ûsþ2dqÊ_m¬WÁ¶Ö\“KJšëæi†Q¤÷üã%U˜=W8S x@Ã,€£Íñʺ1¬Ù{yAW†9)^V¦ÃððÔ^‡1By¸·¨îŒŽö¥á©|c§7{"û?—ƒéF@1—‡lS†¥ýÝeŠÄÀãqÅEÌŸôýh¹Îö¸d=ÈÚïò{¿{ÉÓ•íÌ÷! ýôj÷?IåM•°A……½qó×=nvå­n+¯« ô–`ÝóÖAù?Ûa%DQb†Ésø«³Íþ®h«`ßd&nÖ@"ò *˜2é—ÆÕß ~ý×2{V´umÌ •CXÿüâE~ꆌþ‚<ÙqãĤ´õaÚ•êõÍ9Ž.lœÉŽx-½³í­;Î×VQåo¡°}ø¢LóŸÑ» á O(lƒº#œ"I »+QîaóíûÚ•¡ohÞ›½ÙÖY† ¾LèX²µa%-è°TTý<††WžíŠÛHˆ<¹š H²î(žœ¡8(Ç…ã)J>UNˆ %Ö 0ÜU:ãw@4]qU :€ 0Kº 0D ÆI U: I U:Q U:‹ U:Å *ÿ ) U:> U:x *² U:ÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜ AQ Bg 0D„ 0DÈ 0D   D/PP B D3œc:\office\wpwin\template\opinion.wpt(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX(ßZ>$¡¡Ò°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€X³—XXXÔÓ  ÓÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÑ7€Å XXdìXXdì7ÑÑ  Ñ,†r‰AZ‹"Arial Regular ¤U¥D¦D§¨U©Dª«Ó€·ºn~<$3|xº, øð AZ‹"Arial Regular(û(39¸$¤¤Ý ƒZ>!ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€XÛXXXÔÓ  ÓÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€6yXXdìXXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5,ݵ2 AZ‹"Arial Regular, øð AZ‹"Arial Regular, øð AZ‹"Arial Regular, øð AZ‹"Arial Regular Ý ƒ!¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€X`¦XXXÔÔ€½C XX`¦ÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X`¦X ½CÔÐ  ÐÌò òSeptember€25,€1998Ð šš ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ô² ôXX`¦ÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó Ñ  Ñ, øð AZ‹"Arial Regular,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular Ý ƒ!¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€X`¦XXXÔÔ€½C XX`¦ÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X`¦X ½CÔÐ  ÐÌò òSeptember€21,€1998Ð šš ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ô² ôXX`¦ÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular !"#%Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ d(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó'''÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd 'ÿÿdxdÝ ƒZ>!ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€X`¦XXXÔÓ  ÓÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€fmXXdìXXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ý›Ñ` °ÑÓ  ÓÔ€ X`¦XXX`¦Ôò òÔ€ Š4¨ŠX X`¦ÔÑ€P¸Ññ«ñœñ«ññ·ññ«ñßr€(<,(j 8` `€€@E f ` ttx$X` ð Úrßñ«ññ·ññºññ·ñßr€(<,(j 8` `€€@E f ` ttx$X` ð Úrßñ·ññºññºññºññºññ«ñ›ñ«ññºññºñßt€(>.*jx´ÿð` `€€@EÔP ` ttx$ ˆ ð œ tß›ñºñ€€IN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌAT€JACKSONÌÌFEBRUARY€1998€SESSIONÌÓ  ÓÌÌÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à À àà  à)à p àC.C.A.€NO.€02C01„9708„CC„00297Ð `  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ìà ` àà ¸ àó óAppellant,à h àà À àò òà  à)Ð `  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àWEAKLEY€COUNTYÐ `  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àÐ `  ÐV.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ð ` Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àHON.€WILLIAM€B.€ACREE,€JR.,€Ð ` Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p àJUDGE€Ð ` ÐDAVID€BORNFRIEND,à h àà À àà  à)Ð ` Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)à p à(CRIMINALLY€NEGLIGENTÐ ` Ðà ` àà ¸ àó óAppellee.ò òà h àà À àà  à)à p àHOMICIDE€AND€ARSON)Ð ` Ðó óÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLEE:óóà h àà À àà  àà p àòòFOR€THE€APPELLANT:óóÐ H è ÐÌò òSTEVE€CONLEYà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPà Ð àÐ 8"Ø ÐBRUCE€S.€CONLEYà h àà À àà  àà p àó óAttorney€General€&€Reporterà (# àÐ 8#Ø ÐConley,€Campbell,€Moss€&€Smith€ÌP.O.€Box€427à  àà h àà À àà  àà p àò òELIZABETH€T.€RYANó óÐ 0%Ð ÐUnion€City,€TN€€38261à h àà À àà  àà p àAssistant€Attorney€General€Ð 0&Ð ÐÔ‡Š4¨ŠŠ Š4¨Ôà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à2nd€Floor,€Cordell€Hull€BuildingÐ ('È Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à425€Fifth€Avenue€North€Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àNashville,€TN€€37243ÌÔ#† Š4¨ŠŠŠ4¨– #ÔÌò òà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àTHOMAS€A.€THOMASó óÐ +¨!" Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌò òà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àJAMES€T.€CANNONÐ ø-˜$% Ðó óà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÐ ø.˜%& Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àP.O.€Box€218Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àUnion€City,€TN€38261„0218ÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:_____________________________ÌÌAFFIRMED€ÌÌTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JUDGEÌâ âÐ ˜:812 ÐÑP¸ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑñºñÑP¸ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÑP¸ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÑP¸ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÑP¸ÑÑ  ÑÑ  Ññºññ·ñÑP¸ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÑP¸ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÑP¸ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÑP¸ÑÑ  ÑÑ  Ññ·ññ«ñÑP¸ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÑP¸ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÑP¸ÑÑ  ÑÑ  Ññ«ñÓ  ÓÔ€ „‡{„Š Š4¨Ôò òÔ‡ „‡{„„ „‡{ÔÔ‡ °'Ö°„ „‡{ÔòòOPINIONóóÔ#† „‡{„° °'Ö¶#ÔÔ#† „‡{„„ „‡{—#Ôó óÐ `  Ðâ ââ ââ ââ ââ ââ ââ ââ âÓ  ÓÔ€ X`¦X„ „‡{ÔÌÌÓÓÔ€ Š4¨ŠX X`¦Ôà ` àThe€Appellant,€the€State€of€Tennessee€(state),€appeals€from€a€judgment€of€theÐ  ¢ Ðtrial€court€suppressing€three€statements€made€by€David€Bornfriend€(defendant)€toÏlaw€enforcement€officers.€€The€state€appeals€pursuant€to€Rule€3(c)€of€the€TennesseeÏRules€of€Appellate€Procedure€on€the€basis€that€the€trial€courtððs€order€granting€theÏmotion€to€suppress€had€the€substantive€effect€of€dismissing€the€indictment€againstÏthe€defendant.€€In€this€court,€the€state€contends€ð ðthe€trial€court€erroneouslyÏsuppressed€the€three€statements€given€by€the€defendant€because€none€of€theÏstatements€were€involuntary.ðð€€After€a€thorough€review€of€the€record,€the€briefsÏsubmitted€by€the€parties,€and€the€law€governing€the€issue€presented€for€review,€it€isÏthe€opinion€of€this€court€that€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€should€be€affirmed.€ÌÌà ` àOn€May€5,€1997,€the€Weakley€County€Grand€Jury€returned€a€two€countÏindictment€charging€the€defendant€with€criminally€negligent€homicide,€a€Class€EÏfelony,€and€reckless€burning,€a€Class€A€misdemeanor.€€The€indictment€alleges€theseÏtwo€offenses€were€committed€on€January€11,€1997.ÌÌà ` àThe€facts€in€the€record€are€rather€sparse.€€The€defendant€was€eighteen€(18)Ïyears€of€age€and€a€student€at€the€University€of€Tennessee€at€Martin.€€He€resided€inÏa€dormitory€located€on€the€universityððs€campus.€€During€the€early€morning€hours€ofÏJanuary€11,€1997,€the€defendant€and€a€female€companion€were€in€the€defendantððsÏdormitory€room.€€It€appears€the€defendant€lit€a€candle€and€went€to€sleep.€€He€wasÏawakened€by€the€female€companion€and€told€there€was€a€fire€in€the€room.€€HeÏnoticed€portions€of€the€dormitory€room€were€on€fire.€€The€defendant€ordered€theÏfemale€companion€to€exit€the€room.€€He€attempted€to€extinguish€the€fire€but€wasÐ ’9201 Ðunsuccessful.€€He€then€left€his€room.€€A€person€residing€in€the€dormitory€was€killedÏas€a€result€of€the€fire.ÌÌà ` àThe€defendant€sustained€burns€to€his€hands,€stomach,€thigh,€and€legs.€€HeÏalso€inhaled€a€considerable€amount€of€smoke.€€Someone€carried€him€from€theÏdormitory€and€took€him€to€the€Columbia€Volunteer€General€Hospital.€€The€defendantÏarrived€in€the€emergency€room€at€approximately€2:45€A.M.€€The€burns€sustained€byÏthe€defendant€were€extremely€painful.€€The€pain€intensity€scale€contained€in€theÏmedical€records€has€a€range€of€zero€to€ten.€€The€medical€records€state€the€defendantÏwas€suffering€the€most€severe€pain,€a€level€of€ten.€€The€defendant€was€givenÏDemorol€for€pain€and€Phenergan€for€nausea.€€Both€of€these€medications€have€aÏsedative€effect.€€The€defendant€was€released€from€the€hospital€the€next€day,€JanuaryÏ12,€1997.€€A€physician€advised€the€defendant€to€ð ðtake€rest€for€one€week.ððÌÌà ` àThe€defendant€made€three€(3)€statements€to€officers€from€the€University€ofÏTennessee€at€Martin€Police€Department€and€the€Tennessee€Fire€Marshallððs€Office.€ÏThe€first€statement€was€given€to€Lieutenant€Darrell€Simmons,€an€investigatorÏemployed€by€the€University€of€Tennessee€at€Martin€Police€Department,€who€wasÏassigned€to€investigate€the€fire.€€Lieutenant€Simmons€went€to€the€ColumbiaÏVolunteer€General€Hospital€to€determine€the€status€of€the€individuals€injured€by€theÏfire.€€When€he€visited€the€defendant,€the€defendant€was€unconscious.€€He€laterÏreturned€to€interview€the€defendant€at€7:45€ñ¡ñA.Mñ¡ññ¡ñA.M.ñ¡ñ€and€discovered€the€defendant€wasÏstill€unconscious.Ð  :À00 Їà ` àLieutenant€Simmons€and€Johnny€Hayes,€who€was€employed€by€the€State€ofÏTennessee€Fire€Marshallððs€Office€as€an€arson€investigator,€went€to€the€hospital€laterÏon€the€morning€of€January€11,€1997.€€The€officers€attempted€to€interview€theÏdefendant.€€Lieutenant€Simmons€testified€the€defendant€ð ðcould€talk€okay,€but€heÏwasnððt€totally€clear.€€He€would€fade€in€and€fade€out.ðð€€When€asked€if€the€defendantÏwas€able€to€respond€to€the€questions€propounded,€Lieutenant€Simmons€stated€ð ðtoÏa€degree,€he€was.ðð€€According€to€Lieutenant€Simmons,€the€defendant€would€answerÏa€question,€rotate€his€head,€and€close€his€eyes.€€When€asked€another€question,€theÏdefendant€would€rotate€his€head€towards€Simmons€and€Hayes,€answer€the€question,Ïrotate€his€head,€and€close€his€eyes.€€This€statement€was€not€recorded.ÌÌà ` àOn€the€morning€of€January€13,€1997,€€a€subpoena€òòducesóó€òòtecumóó€for€theÐ ¸X Ðdefendantððs€medical€records€and€blood€tests€was€obtained.€€Ô‡ŠQ¹ŠŠ ŠQ¹ÔThe€€subpoena€wasÐ À!` Ðissued€without€a€docket€number€since€no€charges€had€been€filed.€€Ô#† ŠQ¹ŠŠŠQ¹¬!#ÔLater€in€the€dayÐ È#h Ðon€January€13,€1997,€Lieutenant€Simmons€asked€the€defendant€to€come€to€theÏDepartment€of€Safety€building€on€campus€because€he€wanted€to€talk€to€him€aboutÏthe€details€of€the€fire.€€The€defendant€appeared€at€2:45€P.M.€and€was€interviewed€inÏthe€conference€room.€The€defendantððs€medical€records€were€released€prior€to€theÏinterview.€€The€interview€lasted€for€approximately€one€hour€and€fifteen€minutes€andÏthe€defendantððs€statement€was€tape€recorded.€€During€the€interview,€the€defendantÏtold€Simmons€and€Hayes€that€he€had€no€recollection€of€talking€to€them€on€JanuaryÏ11,€1997.ÌÓÓÌà ` àThe€following€colloquy€also€took€place€during€the€interview:à0 Ð àÐ7´--Ð €%Ð €% ÐÌÌà ` àDefendant:à0  àAm€I€required€to€answer€these€questions?Ð :À00€%€% Їà ` àHayes:à0  àYou€donððt€have€to€answer€them,€David.€€What€we€are€trying€to€do,Ð `  ÐDavid,€is€we€are„„I€am€sure€that€by€now€you€know€that€this€is€aÏvery€serious€matter.€€I€am€sure€that€you€know€that€the€guy€acrossÏthe€hall„„he€didnððt€make€it€through€the€fire.Ð €%€% ÐÌà ` àDefendant:à0  àYeah„„which€I€deeply€regret.Ðt€%€% ÐÌà ` àHayes:à0  àI€understand€that,€sir.€€All€we€are€trying€to€do€is€that€we€are€tryingÐ | Ðto€find€out€what€the€facts€are,€David.€€Thatððs€all€weððre€doing.€ÏWhat€we€are€talking€to€you€about€in€here€is€confidential.€€Itððs€notÏgoing€to€be€in€the€newspaper,€on€TV,€nobody€is€going€to€know€allÏthis€stuff.€€My€files€are€strictly€confidential.€€The€people€who€getÏmy€files€are€my€bosses€in€Nashville€and€the€District€Attorney.€ÏOkay,€thatððs€all.€€If€you€were„„just€ð ðyeah,€we€wereðð€because€atÏsome€point€down€the€road,€we€may€€have€to€ask€you€to€be€moreÏspecific€but€today€we€are€not€going€to€get€into€all€that,€okay?Ð €%€% ÐÌà ` àDefendant:à  àYeah.Ð ¤D ÐÌÌà ` àÌÓÓà ` àAt€the€conclusion€of€the€interview,€the€officers€reiterated€to€the€defendant€ð ðthisÏconversation,€like€we€said,€is€confidential,€between€us.ðð€€Lieutenant€SimmonsÏarranged€for€a€third€interview€on€January€22,€1997.€€The€following€colloquy€tookÏplace€during€Simmonððs€direct€examination:ÌÓÓÌÓˆ+Óà ` àQ.à ¸ àWhere€did€this€interview€take€place?Ð Ø'x Ðà ` àA.à ¸ àIn€the€conference€room€at€the€Department€of€Safety.Ð à)€  Ðà ` àQ.à ¸ àHow€was€it€arranged?Ð è+ˆ"" Ðà ` àA.à ¸ àIt€was€arranged€by€me.Ð ð-$$ Ðà ` àQ.à ¸ àWhat€did€you€do€to€get€Mr.€Bornfriend€there?Ð ø/˜&& Ðà ` àA.à ¸ àI€asked€Mr.€Bornfriend€could€he€come€back€for€a€follow€up€interview.Ð 2 (( Ðà ` àQ.à ¸ àDid€he€agree€to€do€so?Ð 4¨** Ðà ` àA.à ¸ àYes,€he€did.Ð 6°,, Ðâ âà@œœ-Dà****ˆÐ 8¸.. ÐÓÓà ` àQ.à0 ¸ àAt€the€conclusion€of€the€interview,€what€happened€to€Mr.€Bornfriend;Ð `  Ðâ âwas€he€allowed€to€leave€at€that€point?Ð ¸ €%¸ €% ÐÓr.ÓÌà ` àA.à ¸ àYes,€he€was.Ð p  ÐÌà ` àThe€record€does€not€reflect€what€the€defendant€said€during€the€January€22,Ï1997€€interview.€€ÌÌà ` àThe€trial€court€suppressed€all€three€statements€given€by€the€defendant.€€TheÏcourt€found€that€due€to€the€pain€medication€the€defendant€was€receiving€at€theÏhospital€when€the€first€statement€was€given€on€January€11,€the€statement€was€ð ðnotÏa€voluntary€and€willing€statement.ðð€€In€regards€to€the€statement€given€on€January€13Ïat€the€Public€Safety€Building,€the€trial€court€ruled€that€the€prior€issuance€of€theÏsubpoena€òòducesóó€òòtecumóó€constituted€the€initiation€of€formal€criminal€charges€andÐ À!` Ðresulted€in€the€attachment€of€the€defendantððs€Sixth€Amendment€right€to€counsel.€€TheÏcourt€suppressed€this€statement€since€the€defendant€was€interrogated€withoutÏcounsel€present.€€The€trial€court€also€suppressed€the€statement€on€the€basis€that€itÏwas€not€voluntary€due€to€the€officersðð€promises€of€confidentiality.€€The€trial€courtÏsuppressed€the€statement€made€on€January€22€on€the€basis€that€the€defendantððsÏSixth€Amendment€right€to€counsel€had€attached€and€the€officersðð€promise€ofÏconfidentiality€had€never€been€revoked.€€Ìœñ¢ñÌ›Ìñ¢ñ›ÌÓ  Óò òI.ó ó€ò òòòSóótandard€of€Reviewó óÐ 4¨** ÐÓ  ÓÌà ` àWhen€an€accused€is€afforded€an€evidentiary€hearing€on€the€merits€of€a€motionÏto€suppress,€the€findings€of€fact€made€by€the€trial€court€are€binding€upon€theÐ  :À00 Ðappellate€court€unless€the€evidence€contained€in€the€record€preponderates€againstÏthese€findings.€€òòState€v.€Odomóó,€928€S.W.2d€18,€23€(Tenn.€1996).€€ð ðQuestions€ofÐ h  Ðcredibility€of€the€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€of€the€evidence,€and€resolution€ofÏconflicts€in€the€evidence€are€matters€entrusted€to€the€trial€judge€as€the€trier€of€fact.ðð€ÏòòIdóó.€€Provided€that€the€greater€weight€of€the€evidence€supports€the€trial€courtððsÐ €  Ðfindings,€then€those€findings€shall€be€upheld€by€the€appellate€court€and€the€partyÏprevailing€in€the€trial€court€is€entitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidenceÏand€all€reasonable€inferences€which€may€be€drawn€from€that€evidence.€€òòIdóó.Ð ˜8 ÐÌà ` àThis€court€must€now€examine€each€statement€given€by€the€defendant€andÏdetermine€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€they€were€not€€voluntary.€€ToÏdetermine€voluntariness,€this€court€must€look€at€the€totality€of€the€circumstances.€ÏòòOregon€v.€Elstadóó,€470€U.S.€298,€318,€105€S.€Ct.€1285,€1298,€84€L.Ed.2d€222,€238Ð À!` Ð(1985);€òòState€v.€Crumpóó,€834€S.W.2d€265,€271€(Tenn.),€òòcertóó.€òòdeniedóó,€506€U.S.€905,Ð È#h Ð113€S.€Ct.€298,€121€L.Ed.2d€221€(1992).€€This€court€must€also€evaluate€the€last€twoÏstatements€given€by€the€defendant€to€determine€whether€the€trial€court€erred€inÏfinding€they€were€obtained€in€violation€of€the€defendantððs€Sixth€Amendment€€right€toÏcounsel.Ìœñ£ñ̛̛Ìñ£ññ¤ñÌñ¤ñ›à@pp#Dàò òII.€January€11€Statementó óˆÐ ø/˜&& ÐÌà ` à€A€confession€must€be€freely,€voluntarily€and€knowingly€made€or€it€should€beÏsuppressed€because€it€was€obtained€in€violation€of€the€defendantððs€rights€under€theÏFifth€Amendment€to€the€United€States€Constitution€and€Article€I,€ðð€9€of€theÏTennessee€Constitution.€€€òòState€v.€Pritchettóó,€621€S.W.2d€127,€133€(Tenn.€1981);Ð  :À00 ÐòòState€v.€Gentryóó,€881€S.W.2d€1,€5€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€€The€Fifth€AmendmentÐ `  Ðapplies€to€the€states€through€the€Fourteenth€Amendment.€€òòMalloy€v.€Hoganóó,€378€U.S.Ð h  Ð1,€84€S.€Ct.€1489,€12€L.Ed.2d€653€(1964);€òòState€v.€Crumpóó,€834€S.W.2d€at€268.€Ð p  ÐÌ€à ` àThe€test€for€the€voluntariness€of€confessions€pursuant€to€Article€I,€ðð€9€of€theÐ €  ÐTennessee€Constitution€is€broader€than€the€test€for€voluntariness€under€the€FifthÏAmendment.€€òòState€v.€Stephensonóó,€878€S.W.2d€530,€544€(Tenn.€1994);€òòState€v.Ð 0  ÐSmithóó,€834€S.W.2d€915,€918„19€(Tenn.€1992).€€As€our€supreme€court€noted€inÐ ˜8 ÐòòCrumpóó:Ð  @ ÐÓÓÌà0 ` àThe€significant€difference€between€these€two€provisions€is€that€the€test€ofÏvoluntariness€for€confessions€under€Article€I,€ðð€9€is€broader€and€moreÏprotective€of€individual€rights€than€the€test€of€voluntariness€was€under€the€FifthÏAmendment.Ð ` €%` €% ÐÌÓÓ834€S.W.2d€at€268;Ô‡ŠQ¹ŠŠ ŠQ¹Ô€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Smithóó,€834€S.W.2d€at€915Ô#† ŠQ¹ŠŠŠQ¹,A#Ô.Ð À!` ÐÌà ` àThe€defendant€asserts€that€at€the€time€he€gave€his€first€statement€to€the€policeÏhe€was€so€impaired€by€the€medication€he€was€receiving€in€the€hospital€that€hisÏstatement€was€not€the€product€of€a€free€mind€and€rational€intellect.€€Before€anÏaccused€is€entitled€to€have€his€statement€suppressed€on€the€grounds€that€he€wasÏunder€the€influence€of€alcohol€and/or€narcotic€drugs,€it€must€be€established€that€theÏaccusedððs€faculties€were€so€impaired€that€the€statement€could€not€be€considered€theÏproduct€of€a€ð ðfree€mind€and€rational€intellect.ðð€€òòVandergriff€v.€Stateóó,€409€S.W.2d€370,Ð 2 (( Ð373€(Tenn.€1966);€€òòState€v.€Robinsonóó,€622€S.W.2d€62,€67€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1980),Ð 4¨** Ðòòcertóó.€òòdeniedóó,€454€U.S.€1096,€102€S.€Ct.€667,€70€L.Ed.2d€636€(1981);€òòseeóó€òòBram€v.Ð 6°,, ÐUnited€Statesóó,€168€U.S.€532,€18€S.€Ct.€183,€42€L.Ed.€568€(1897).€€If€it€is€establishedÐ 8¸.. Ðthat€the€accused€was€capable€of€giving€a€narrative€of€past€events€and/or€relating€hisÐ  :À00 Ðrole€in€the€commission€of€the€offense,€the€statement€is€generally€admissibleÏnotwithstanding€the€fact€that€the€accused€was€under€the€influence€of€alcohol€and/orÏnarcotics€when€he€made€the€statement.€€òòState€v.€Greenóó,€613€S.W.2d€229,€232„33Ð p  Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1980);€òòDukes€v.€Stateóó,€578€S.W.2d€659,€663€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð x Ð1978);€òòWilliams€v.€Stateóó,€491€S.W.2d€862,€866€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1972).€€Ð €  ÐÌà ` àIn€the€case€òòsubóó€òòjudiceóó,€the€defendant€was€under€the€influence€of€the€sedativesÐ 0  ÐDemorol€and€Phenergan€for€pain€and€nausea€at€the€time€the€officers€questioned€him.€ÏLieutenant€Simmons€admitted€that€during€questioning€the€defendant€ð ðwould€fade€inÏand€out.ðð€€Between€questions,€the€defendant€would€turn€his€head€away€from€theÏofficers€and€close€his€eyes.€€The€defendant€had€no€recollection€of€this€conversationÏwith€the€officers€afterwards.ÌÌà ` àAs€the€record€does€not€preponderate€against€the€findings€of€the€trial€court,€weÏagree€with€the€trial€courtððs€determination€to€suppress€this€statement€as€an€involuntaryÏconfession€made€by€the€defendant€while€he€was€under€the€influence€of€narcotics.€ÏThis€issue€has€no€merit.Ìœñ¥ñÌñ¥ñ›Ìà@RR#Dàò òIII.€January€13€Statementó óˆÐ ð-$$ ÐÌà ` àThe€trial€court€suppressed€the€statement€given€at€the€Department€of€SafetyÏBuilding€on€January€13€on€two€bases:€(1)€€the€statement€was€obtained€in€violationÏof€the€defendantððs€Sixth€Amendment€right€to€counsel€and€(2)€the€statement€was€notÏvoluntary€because€it€was€procured€by€promises€of€confidentiality€by€the€investigatingÏofficers.€€The€state€argues€that€the€statements€should€not€be€suppressed€since€theÐ  :À00 Ðdefendantððs€Sixth€Amendment€right€to€counsel€had€not€attached€because€adversarialÏproceedings€had€not€been€initiated€against€the€defendant.€€The€State€of€TennesseeÏalso€asserts€that€the€conduct€of€the€officers€did€not€ð ðundermine€the€accusedððs€freeÏwill€and€critically€impair€his€capacity€for€self„determinationðð€sufficiently€to€bring€aboutÏan€involuntary€confession.€€ÌÌà@ØØ.Dàò òA.ó óˆÐ 0  ÐÌà ` àA€defendantððs€Sixth€Amendment€right€to€counsel€does€not€attach€untilÏadversarial€proceedings€have€been€initiated.€€òòState€v.€Mitchellóó,€593€S.W.2d€280,€286Ð ¨H Ð(Tenn.),€òòcert.óó€òòdeniedóó,€449€U.S.€845,€101€S.€Ct.€128,€66€L.Ed.2d€53€(1980).€€InÐ °P ÐTennessee,€the€beginning€of€the€adversarial€judicial€process€is€marked€by€a€formalÏcharge€such€as€an€arrest€warrant,€indictment,€presentment€or€preliminary€hearing€inÏcases€where€an€arrest€warrant€was€not€first€obtained.€€òòState€v.€Mitchellóó,€593€S.W.2dÐ È#h Ðat€286;€òòState€v.€Butleróó,€795€S.W.2d€680,€685€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).Ð Ð%p ÐÌà ` àIn€the€present€case,€Lieutenant€Simmons€had€obtained€a€subpoena€òòducesóóÐ à)€  Ðòòtecumóó€on€January€13€for€the€defendantððs€medical€records€and€blood€tests.€€Later€thatÐ è+ˆ"" Ðday€the€defendant€gave€his€second€statement€to€the€police€at€the€Department€ofÏSafety€building.€The€defendantððs€medical€records€were€released€prior€to€theÏinterview.€ÌÌà ` àThe€defendant€asserts€that€the€execution€of€the€subpoena€òòducesóó€òòtecumóóÐ 6°,, Ðconstituted€the€initiation€of€the€adversarial€process€and€the€attachment€of€theÏdefendantððs€Sixth€Amendment€right€to€counsel.€€The€defendant€states€issuance€ofÐ  :À00 Ðthe€subpoena€by€the€General€Sessions€Court€Clerk€and€the€style€of€the€subpoenaÏ(State€of€Tennessee€v.€David€Bornfriend)€indicate€that€the€adversarial€process€hadÏbeen€initiated€against€the€defendant.€The€trial€court€suppressed€the€statement€givenÏon€January€13€based€upon€the€determination€that€the€adversarial€process€againstÏthe€defendant€had€begun.€€ÌÌà ` àThere€is€no€authority€in€Tennessee€to€support€the€proposition€that€theÏissuance€of€a€subpoena€òòducesóó€òòtecumóó€constitutes€the€initiation€of€the€adversarialÐ ˜8 Ðprocess.€€A€subpoena€òòducesóó€òòtecumóó€bears€greater€resemblance€to€a€search€warrantÐ  @ Ðthan€an€indictment,€presentment,€or€arrest€warrant.€€In€fact,€the€adversarial€processÏwas€not€initiated€against€the€defendant€until€a€warrant€for€his€arrest€was€issued€onÏJanuary€23.€€Therefore,€the€defendantððs€Sixth€Amendment€right€to€counsel€had€notÏattached€at€the€time€his€statements€were€given.€€The€trial€court€erred€in€suppressingÏthe€statements€given€on€January€13€on€the€basis€that€the€defendantððs€SixthÏAmendment€right€to€counsel€had€been€violated.Ìœñ¦ñÌ›Ìñ¦ñ›Ìà@ØØ.Dàò òB.ó óˆÐ à)€  ÐÌà ` àThe€trial€court€also€suppressed€the€defendantððs€statement€of€January€13€onÏthe€basis€that€the€confession€was€not€voluntary€due€to€promises€of€confidentiality€byÏthe€investigating€officers€which€had€the€effect€of€overcoming€the€defendantððs€will.€ÏThe€State€of€Tennessee€asserts€that€the€defendantððs€will€was€not€overborne€byÏpromises€of€confidentiality€because€those€promises€were€limited€to€questions€relatingÏto€whether€the€defendant€and€Sarah€Branscumb€engaged€in€sexual€activity.€TheÏstate€also€argues€that€even€if€this€court€finds€the€statements€made€by€the€officersÐ  :À00 Ðwere€in€reference€to€the€entire€interview,€these€statements€were€not€blanketÏpromises€of€confidentiality€but€were€merely€guarantees€that€the€information€wouldÏnot€be€revealed€to€the€press.ÌÌà ` àDuring€the€second€interview€of€the€defendant,€in€response€to€the€defendantÏasking€whether€he€was€required€to€answer€these€questions,€Officer€HayesÏresponded€as€follows:ÌÓÓÌà ` àHayes:à0  àYou€donððt€have€to€answer€them,€David.€Ðœ<€%€% ÐÌà@rr-Dà*****ˆÌÌà ` àHayes:à0  àI€understand€that,€sir.€€All€we€are€trying€to€do€is€that€we€are€tryingÐ ¬L Ðto€find€out€what€the€facts€are,€David.€€Thatððs€all€weððre€doing.€Ïò òWhat€we€are€talking€to€you€about€in€here€is€confidential.€€ItððsÐ ´T Ðnot€going€to€be€in€the€newspaper,€on€TV,€nobody€is€going€toÏknow€all€this€stuff.€€My€files€are€strictly€confidential.€€ó óTheÐ ¼ \ Ðpeople€who€get€my€files€are€my€bosses€in€Nashville€and€theÏDistrict€Attorney.€€Okay,€thatððs€all.€€If€you€were„just€ð ðyeah,€weÏwereðð€because€at€some€point€in€time€down€the€road,€we€mayÏhave€to€ask€you€to€be€more€specific€but€today€we€are€not€goingÏto€get€into€all€that,€okay?€(emphasis€added).Ð €%€% ÐÓ\\ÓÌAt€the€conclusion€of€the€interview,€the€officers€reiterated€to€the€defendant€that€ð ð[ò òt]hisÐ Ü(| Ðconversationó ó,€like€we€said,€is€confidential,€ò òbetween€usó ó.ðð€(emphasis€added).€TheÐ ä*„!! Ðtrial€court€reasoned€that,€ð ð[t]he€clear€meaning€of€the€word€confidential€is€that€it€isÏconfidential,€it€will€not€be€used€in€any€public€proceeding€such€as€in€this€courtroom,ððÏwhen€he€suppressed€the€statement€as€involuntary.€€ÌÌÔ€ŠQ¹ŠŠ ŠQ¹Ôà ` àA€confession€must€be€ð ðfree€and€voluntary;€that€is,€it€must€not€be€extracted€byÐ  5¬++ Ðany€sort€of€threats€or€violence,€nor€obtained€by€any€direct€or€implied€promises,Ïhowever€slight,€nor€by€the€exertion€of€any€improper€influence.ðð€€òòBram€v.€UnitedÐ 9¼// ÐStatesóó,€168€U.S.€532,€542„43,€18€S.€Ct.€183,€186,€42€L.Ed.€568€(1897);€òòState€v.Ð `  ÐKellyóó,€603€S.W.2d€726,€727€(Tenn.€1980).€€ð ðThe€Fifth€Amendment€does€not€condemnÐ h  Ðall€promise„induced€admissions€and€confessions;€it€condemns€only€those€which€areÏcompelled€by€promises€of€leniency.ðð€€òòKellyóó,€603€S.W.2d€at€729€(quoting€òòHunter€v.Ð x ÐSwensonóó,€372€F.€Supp.€287,€300„01€(D.C.Mo.€1974)).€€The€test€for€voluntariness€inÐ €  Ðrelation€to€police€deception€is€whether€based€upon€the€totality€of€the€circumstances,Ïð ðthe€conduct€of€the€law€enforcement€officers€was€such€€to€undermine€the€accusedððsÏfree€will€and€critically€impair€his€capacity€for€self„determination€so€as€to€bring€aboutÏan€involuntary€confession.ðð€€òòCrumpóó,€834€S.W.2d€at€271€(citing€òòCulombe€v.Ð  @ ÐConnecticutóó,€367€U.S.€568,€602,€81€S.€Ct.€1860,€1879,€6€L.Ed.2d€1037,€1057„58Ð ¨H Ð(1961);€òòState€v.€Kellyóó,€603€S.W.2d€at€728).Ð °P ÐÌà ` àThe€promise€of€confidentiality€occurred€during€the€preliminary€portion€ofÏdefendantððs€statement€to€the€police.€€The€trial€court€implicitly€found€that€following€theÏpromise€of€confidentiality,€defendant€made€his€statements€in€reliance€upon€theÏofficersðð€promise.€€Ô‡ŠQ¹ŠŠŠQ¹ÔThis€is€apparently€a€case€of€first€impression€on€this€precise€issue,Ð Ø'x Ðand€other€jurisdictions€have€determined€that€a€promise€of€confidentiality€by€a€lawÏenforcement€officer€renders€an€otherwise€voluntary€statement€involuntary.€€€€òòStateÐ è+ˆ"" Ðv.€McDermottóó,€131€N.H.€495,€554€A.2d€1302€(1989);€òòState€v.€Nashóó,€228€Neb.€69,€421Ð ð-$$ ÐN.W.2d€41€(1988);€òòUnited€States€v.€Wolfóó,€601€F.Supp.€435,€441„53€(N.D.Ill.€1984).€Ð ø/˜&& ÐAfter€hearing€the€evidence,€the€trial€court€determined€that€defendantððs€statement€ofÏJanuary€13€was€involuntary€based€upon€the€officersðð€promise€of€confidentiality.€ÏÔ#†ŠQ¹ŠŠŠQ¹Bh#ÔÔ‡ŠQ¹ŠŠŠQ¹ÔAbsent€evidence€preponderating€against€the€findings€of€the€trial€court,€the€findingsÐ 6°,, Ðof€fact€of€the€trial€court€on€a€motion€to€suppress€are€binding.€€Ô#†ŠQ¹ŠŠŠQ¹"k#ÔÔ‡ŠQ¹ŠŠŠQ¹ÔFrom€our€review€of€theÐ 8¸.. Ðrecord€and€the€law,€we€concur€that€the€officerððs€promise€of€confidentiality€in€the€caseÐ  :À00 Ðòòsubóó€òòjudiceóó€operated€to€deprive€Defendant€of€his€free€will€and€was€not,€therefore,Ð `  Ðvoluntary€under€the€totality€of€the€circumstances.€Ô#†ŠQ¹ŠŠŠQ¹l#ÔÔ‡ŠÖ, ŠŠŠQ¹Ô€Ô#†ŠQ¹Š ŠŠÖ,m#ÔÔ€ŠQ¹ŠŠŠQ¹ÔThis€issue€is€without€merit.Ð h  ÐÌà@  "Dàò òIV.€€January€22€Statementó ó€ˆÐ Œ, ÐÌà ` àThe€trial€court€also€suppressed€a€statement€given€by€the€defendant€onÏJanuary€22€on€the€basis€that€the€confession€was€obtained€in€violation€of€theÏdefendantððs€Sixth€Amendment€right€to€counsel.€€The€statement€was€also€suppressedÏas€an€involuntary€confession€induced€by€the€earlier€promises€of€confidentiality€whichÏhad€not€been€revoked.€€The€State€of€Tennessee€asserts€that€the€defendantððs€SixthÏAmendment€right€to€counsel€had€not€attached€and€the€prior€confession€was€notÏillegally€obtained.ÌÌà ` àThe€defendant€returned€to€the€Safety€Building€located€on€the€University€ofÏTennessee€at€Martin€campus€on€January€22€after€the€investigators€called€theÏdefendant€in€for€a€follow„up€interview.€€This€interview€was€not€recorded€and€there€isÏno€transcript€of€€this€meeting€in€the€record.€€The€record€indicates€that€€the€smokeÏdetector€in€the€defendantððs€room€was€discussed.ÌÌà ` àAs€to€the€first€basis€relied€upon€by€the€trial€court€in€suppressing€the€statement,Ïwe€have€already€ruled€in€this€opinion€that€the€defendantððs€statement€of€January€13Ïdid€not€violate€the€defendantððs€Sixth€Amendment€right€to€counsel.€€We€have€foundÏthat€the€adversarial€process€against€the€defendant€was€not€initiated€until€an€arrestÏwarrant€was€issued€on€January€23.€€Therefore,€his€Sixth€Amendment€right€to€counsel€Ïhad€not€attached€when€the€January€22€statement€was€given.Ð 4:Ô00 Їà ` àIn€suppressing€the€January€22€statement€on€the€basis€that€the€earlier€promisesÏof€confidentiality€had€not€been€revoked€and€that€the€January€22€statement€wasÏtherefore€involuntary,€the€trial€court€relied€upon€our€supreme€courtððs€decision€in€òòÔ‡ŠQ¹ŠŠŠQ¹ÔStateÐ p  Ðv.€Smithóó,€834€S.W.2d€915,€919€(Tenn.€1992).€€In€òòSmithóóÔ#†ŠQ¹ŠŠŠQ¹ït#Ô,€the€supreme€court€held€thatÐ x Ðthe€provisiñ ñoñ ñns€of€Article€I,€Section€9€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution€necessitate€thatÏthe€extraction€of€an€illegal,€unwarned€confession€from€a€defendant€raises€aÏrebuttable€presumption€that€a€subsequent€confession€is€tainted€by€the€initial€illegality.€ÏHowever,€if€the€State€can€establish€that€the€taint€ð ðis€so€attenuated€as€to€justifyÏadmission€of€the€subsequent€confession,ðð€then€the€presumption€may€be€overcome.€ÏòòIdóó.,€òòquotingóó€òòOregon€v.€Elstadóó,€470€U.S.€298,€335,€105€S.Ct.€1285,€1306„07,€84Ð ¨H ÐL.Ed.2d€222€(1985).€€As€noted€previously€in€this€opinion,€the€record€is€rather€sparseÏconcerning€the€January€22€statement€of€defendant.€€òòState€v.€Odomóó,€928€S.W.2d€18,Ð ¸X Ð23€(Tenn.€œ1996)ñªñ,ñªñ›€mandates€that€the€findings€of€fact€made€by€the€trial€court€areÏbinding€upon€the€appellate€court€unless€the€evidence€contained€in€the€recordÏpreponderates€against€those€findings.€€Unfortunately€for€the€State,€the€factsÏcontained€in€the€record€do€not€preponderate€against€the€findings€of€the€trial€court€inÏthis€case.€€Therefore,€the€trial€courtððs€judgment€that€the€January€22€statement€shouldÏbe€suppressed€must€be€affirmed.ÌÌò òà@VV(Dàœñ©ñIñ©ñV.›€€Conclusionó óˆÐ ø/˜&& Ðñ§ñÓÓñ§ñÌñ§ñÓºzÓñ§ñà ` àThis€court€concludes€that€the€defendantððs€Sixth€Amendment€right€to€counselÏdid€not€attach€until€an€arrest€warrant€was€issued€against€him€on€January€23.€ÏTherefore,€the€trial€court€erred€by€using€as€a€basis€to€suppress€the€statements€thatÏdefendantððs€Sixth€Amendment€rights€had€been€violated.€€However,€the€trial€court€wasÐ  :À00 Ðcorrect€in€suppressing€the€January€11€statement€upon€finding€that€the€statement€wasÏnot€a€product€of€a€free€mind€and€rational€intellect€and€was€therefore€involuntary.€ÏFurthermore,€the€trial€court€was€correct€in€its€conclusion€that€the€January€13€andÏJanuary€22€statements€should€be€suppressed€because€they€were€involuntary€as€aÏresult€of€the€Stateððs€promises€of€confidentiality.€€Accordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trialÏcourt€is€affirmed.ÌÌÔ‡ŠQ¹ŠŠŠQ¹ÔÓÓÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à____________________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JudgeÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌòò(Not€participating)*€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óó€Ð À!` ÐJOE€B.€JONES,€Presiding€JudgeÌÌÌ___________________________________ÌJOHN€H.€PEAY,€JudgeÔ#†ŠQ¹ŠŠŠQ¹~#ÔÔ€&¶ &ŠŠQ¹ÔÐ Ô&t ÐÔ‡ô%ü ô &&¶ÔÌÌÌÌÌÌœñ¨ñÌñ¨ññ©ñ›ñ©ññ¨ñÌñ¨ñ›ÌÌ*Judge€Joe€B.€Jones€died€May€1,€1998,€and€did€not€participate€in€this€opinion.€€We€acknowledge€his€faithfulÏservice€to€this€Court,€both€as€a€member€of€the€Court€and€as€its€Presiding€Judge.Ô#†&¶ & ôô%ü€#Ô