James H. Durrence was convicted of three counts of child molestation based on acts committed against his girlfriend’s seven-year-old daughter, H. M. He was sentenced as a recidivist to twenty years on each count, to run concurrently, with eight years to serve and the rest on probation. On appeal, Durrence contends that the trial court erred in admitting his statement into evidence and in granting the state’s motion in limine to exclude evidence of a report of molestation made by A. P., H. M.’s half-sister. Discerning no error, we affirm. 1. Durrence argues that the trial court erred in ruling that his pre-arrest statement was non-custodial, freely and voluntarily given, and admissible in evidence although he was not given Miranda 1 warnings. A person is considered to be in custody and Miranda warnings are required when a person is 1 formally arrested or 2 restrained to the degree associated with a formal arrest. Unless a reasonable person in the suspect’s situation would perceive that he was in custody, Miranda warnings are not necessary. Thus, the relative inquiry is how a reasonable person in Durrence’s position would perceive his situation.2 Whether a person is in custody for Miranda purposes is a mixed question of law and fact,3 and the trial court’s factual findings on this issue will not be disturbed unless they are clearly erroneous.4 In the case at bar, the evidence supports the trial court’s ruling. GBI agent Cyrus Purdiman testified at the Jackson-Denno 5 hearing that the DFCS worker assigned to H. M.’s case contacted Durrence to come in to Evans County DFCS’s office on March 14, 2006. The DFCS worker notified Purdiman, who arranged to be there to interview Durrence. Purdiman testified that before the interview began, he introduced himself to Durrence and stated that he worked as a special agent for the GBI. Purdiman told Durrence that he was not under arrest, was free to go, and did not have to make a statement. Purdiman explained that he wanted to discuss the allegations against Durrence. Durrence became emotional, even tearful, and he made disclosures regarding his conduct with H. M. Purdiman wrote down Durrence’s disclosures and gave him an opportunity to review his statement. Durrence signed each page and initialled corrections that were made. Purdiman signed the statement as well. Based on Durrence’s admissions that he touched H. M. inappropriately and exposed himself to her, Purdiman walked him over to the sheriff’s office and placed him under arrest.
The statement was read into evidence for the purpose of the hearing. In the statement, Durrence admitted that he touched H. M. on her inner thigh near her vagina while she was sitting in his lap; that H. M. pushed his hand way from her private area; that twice on the same day in February 2006, Durrence pulled his pants away from his body so that H. M. saw his penis; and that on that same night, after H. M. went to bed, he went into her bedroom, pulled his penis out of his pants, held it in his hand, and pulled the skin back from the head of his penis. Durrence further stated that his penis was not erect when he exposed it to H. M.
