The Colorado Supreme Court’s majority ruled on Monday that a Longmont detective did not coerce a suspect into talking by making references to how a judge would look at his character, and by suggesting he may get out of prison “in time to see your son’s prom.”

Under the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision Miranda v. Arizona, law enforcement is required to inform suspects of their rights to remain silent and to consult with an attorney before interrogating them in custody. A failure to give a Miranda warning means the prosecution may not be able to use the defendant’s statements as evidence at trial.

On March 9, the state Supreme Court agreed that Angelo Joseph Torres never clearly invoked his Miranda rights and voluntarily spoke with Detective Daniel Kilian.

However, by 5-2, the justices also concluded that Kilian’s subsequent tactics were fair game and did not coerce Torres into making incriminating statements, including Kilian’s suggestion that Torres could be free by the time of his unborn son’s high school prom.

“Detective Kilian’s reference to the possibility that Torres might not be released from prison until his unborn son’s prom is evocative, to be sure, but it does not amount to psychological coercion,” wrote Justice Maria E. Berkenkotter for the majority.

Justice Brian D. Boatright disagreed with that characterization of Kilian’s conduct.

“I am particularly concerned about the detective connecting Torres’s unborn son to the interrogation. It served no legal purpose. It certainly did not help make his statements voluntary,” wrote Boatright for himself and Justice Susan Blanco. “The only explanation for intimating that Torres would not get out of prison until his ‘son’s prom’ was to exploit Torres’s emotions. It was purely an emotional ploy. And it worked.”

Torres turned himself in to the Longmont Police Department on an active warrant. In an interrogation room, Kilian read Torres his Miranda rights and asked if he wanted to talk.

“Nah, I just don’t know why I am doing this,” said Torres. “I don’t even know what the warrant’s for.”

“You’re asking a bunch of questions that I really can’t talk about unless you waive your rights and want to talk,” responded Kilian, adding that Torres could choose to stop speaking at any point. “I think there’s some things that you’d probably like to hear that I had to say. I know you have a baby boy on the way.”

Torres asked what Kilian wanted to discuss. Kilian said that Torres had to relinquish his Miranda rights to find out. Torres continued to seek details about the warrant and mentioned he already knew about one felony charge.

“There’s some additional charges that are going to be put on you,” said Kilian. “Those are the ones I want to talk to you about.”

Torres agreed to sign a form and talk with Kilian. He told the detective he already knew he was going to jail, but “I just want to know what’s going on.”

Kilian responded that Torres faced charges related to an investigation into another suspect, who allegedly received a plea offer of 15-25 years in prison.

“We’re looking at charging you with conspiracy, which puts you maybe getting out in time to see your son’s prom,” said Kilian. “If you talk to me about everything, then I put it on the record that you (voluntarily) told me this.”

He continued, “The judge is going to look at you in one of two ways. Either there’s evidence you were truthful about it, or there’s evidence and you said, ‘No, no, no, no, no.’ And how does that look for your character?”

After Torres made incriminating statements to Kilian, a Boulder County grand jury indicted him for charges related to drugs, guns, and human trafficking. The defense sought to exclude Torres’ statements from the trial, arguing Kilian coerced him into speaking.

District Court Judge Dea M. Lindsey granted the motion. She believed Torres invoked his Miranda rights out the outset, and his statements to Kilian were involuntary. Specifically, Kilian’s references to Torres’ unborn son and his speculation about the leniency Torres might receive were coercive.

The district attorney’s office appealed to the Supreme Court. The justices disagreed with Lindsey and concluded, in context, that Torres had not invoked his right to silence during the interrogation.

“Torres did not simply say ‘(n)ah’ without more. He immediately continued, pressing for information and talking over Detective Kilian,” wrote Berkenkotter. “And, notably, here, it was Torres who sought information from Detective Kilian, not the other way around.”

The majority did not believe Kilian’s conduct was coercive, as he merely “encouraged Torres to be truthful.”

“Torres was familiar with the criminal justice system; he voluntarily turned himself into police custody, and he showed absolutely no signs of mental or emotional incapacity or distress at any point during the interrogation,” wrote Berkenkotter in finding Torres had voluntarily incriminated himself to Kilian.

Boatright, in dissent, argued that Kilian’s comments, after Torres signed the Miranda rights waiver, amounted to promises or “emotional exploitation” aimed at getting Torres to speak about his alleged criminal activity.

“Again, the detective attempted to leverage Torres’s emotions regarding his unborn child. The detective then threw Torres a lifeline when he promised to help Torres if he cooperated,” wrote Boatright. “It was then that Torres made inculpatory statements. In my opinion, he did not make them voluntarily.”

The case is People v. Torres.