BARRETT v. STATE (2025)

Martin E. Barrett appeals his judgment and sentence for first-degree murder. He argues three issues to support reversal. First, that the trial court erred in admitting photographic evidence of the victim's body. Second, that the trial court erred in admitting video evidence of a police interview conducted in Barrett's garage. And finally, that the trial court erred in admitting certain evidence of Barrett's actions after the victim's death. We affirm but write to briefly address the second issue.

Barrett asserts that the video of the police interview conducted in his garage should have been suppressed because it was an un-Mirandized custodial interrogation. Having reviewed the record, and considering all the circumstances of the interview, we conclude otherwise.

This case began as a missing person investigation. A friend and co-worker of the victim called police and requested a welfare check after not hearing from the victim for several days. The victim and Barrett had lived together for years. Barrett voluntarily returned home to meet with law enforcement officers who were attempting to locate the then-missing victim. They interviewed Barrett in the garage while the home was being searched.

We conclude this interview was not a custodial interrogation that required a Miranda warning. See Herard v. State, 390 So. 3d 610, 619 (Fla. 2024), cert. denied sub nom. Herard v. Fla., ––– U.S. ––––, 145 S. Ct. 1315, 221 L.Ed.2d 399 (2025) (“Miranda warnings are not required unless the defendant is both ‘in custody and under interrogation.’ ” (quoting Davis v. State, 698 So. 2d 1182, 1188 (Fla. 1997))). The video recording of the garage interview shows police asking Barrett standard questions for a missing person investigation. Police were gathering information to aid in finding the victim. Nothing in the video suggests that Barrett was not free to leave if he wanted to. Accordingly, the trial court did not err in denying Barrett's request to suppress the video.

Affirmed.

Per Curiam.

Roberts, Bilbrey, and Nordby, JJ., concur.