The court upheld the defendant’s convictions for arson of an occupied dwelling and nine counts of attempted first-degree murder. The circuit court didn’t err in denying the defendant’s motion to suppress his confession, given after he waived Miranda rights properly read to him, because it was not the product of a deliberate and coercive two-step interrogation technique like the one proscribed in Missouri v. Seibert, 542 U.S. 600 (2004), and was not otherwise involuntary. Reviewing courts analyze an officer’s deliberateness in using unconstitutional interrogation techniques as a finding of fact, reversible only when plainly wrong or without evidence to support it.
The defendant’s convictions also were supported by sufficient evidence. Affirmed.