State of Tennessee v. R. D. S.

This appeal arises out of a finding of delinquency following a denial of a motion to suppress
incriminating statements and seized evidence. The trial court found that the juvenile defendant was not in custody at the time he made his incriminating statements, thus not triggering Miranda requirements; the Court of Appeals agreed. We affirm that part of the Court of Appeals’ holding. However, due to a lack of evidence in the record regarding the law enforcement officer’s role as a school resource officer, we remand the case to the trial court for a new trial to determine whether the law enforcement officer was required to have reasonable suspicion or probable cause to search the juvenile defendant’s truck. Tenn. R. App. P. 11; Judgment of the Court of Appeals Affirmed in Part, Reversed in Part and Remanded