from a judgment and an order of the circuit court for Kenosha
County Nos. 2012CF360, 2012CF884: S. MICHAEL WILK, Judge.
Neubauer, C.J., Reilly, P.J., and Hagedorn, J.
Karl L. Quigley appeals from a judgment entered after he pled
no contest to two criminal complaints charging him with
various sex offenses against P.R., a minor female. Quigley
contends that statements he gave to a detective should have
been suppressed because they were made while in custody
without the benefit of Miranda warnings. Quigley
also contends that his right against self-incrimination was
violated when, after he was compelled to make a statement to
his probation agent, the police reinterviewed P.R. We
disagree with the former, but agree with the latter. The
State concedes that this error, if we so find, requires that
the entire plea to both criminal complaints be set aside.
Therefore, we reverse the judgment.
Initial Encounter with Police at McDonald's
Quigley was charged with nine felonies under Kenosha County
case No. 2012CF360. The charges stemmed from a complaint made
on March 14, 2012, by a manager at a McDonald's
restaurant that Quigley was acting inappropriately with P.R.
Police Officer Willie Hamilton, along with two other
officers, responded to the scene and spoke with the manager
who told him that he saw P.R. place her legs on Quigley and
her head on his shoulder. The manager was concerned because she
did not think that Quigley was P.R.'s father. Hamilton
questioned Quigley and P.R. separately. Hamilton saw a bag
with two cellular phones inside; he asked and was given
consent to look at the phones. Hamilton discovered that one
of the phones-Quigley and P.R. did not agree on who owned
which phone-had nude photographs and videos of
Hamilton asked Quigley about the nature of his relationship
with P.R., and he said that "he loved
her."Quigley "knew it was wrong, " and
"he even told her mother if she was old enough, he would
marry her." Hamilton told Quigley that "[h]e needed
to come to the police department to speak with a detective
about the case." Quigley agreed to speak with a
detective. Hamilton patted Quigley down and placed him
uncuffed in the back of his squad car, which could not be
opened from the inside. Hamilton brought Quigley to the
police station and had him wait in a waiting area while
Hamilton spoke with his supervisor. Hamilton never told
Quigley that he was being taken into custody.
The waiting room was about ten by sixteen, with multiple
seats, a television set, and two doors. The doors led to the
hallway and the detective bureau. The doors were closed but
not locked. No one was stationed in the waiting room to guard
While Quigley waited, Detective Jason Melichar interviewed
P.R. who provided him with a written statement. In the
statement she said that she and Quigley had kissed, that in
November 2011 he had exposed his penis to her and had asked
her to touch it, and that at his request she had recorded
sexually explicit videos of herself.
Police Interview Quigley
After waiting more than an hour, according to Quigley,
Melichar brought him into an interrogation room and began
questioning him. At the time, Quigley was on probation.
Quigley had been on probation on five or six prior occasions
and also had been previously subject to a probation hold.
Quigley believed that he had to cooperate with the police in
order to avoid being placed on a hold. But, in any case,
whether he cooperated or not, Quigley thought he would be
placed on a hold.
According to a transcript of the interview, Melichar told
Quigley that he wanted to explain a couple of things to make
sure that "we're clear." Melichar stated that
he wanted to make sure that Quigley understood that he was
not under arrest, that he was free to leave, and that they
were "here just to talk about this case." Quigley
confirmed that he understood. Quigley acknowledged to
Melichar that while being transported to the police
department he had not been placed in handcuffs or told he was
During the course of the interview, Melichar asked Quigley
about how he met P.R.-through her father; how long he had
known her-three years; and the nature of their
relationship-"a very good friend." As the interview
progressed, Quigley said that P.R. had kissed him with her
tongue, had flashed her breasts at him, and had touched his
penis over his pants. Quigley had smacked her on her buttocks
and had asked her to make videos of herself with a phone he
had purchased for her.
At this point in the interview, Quigley told Melichar that he
was "getting ready to be arrested" because he knew
what he "was doing [was] wrong." Melichar asked
Quigley if his feelings had changed about being there freely,
and Quigley responded, "[n]o, I did come here
freely." Quigley denied that Melichar had done anything
to make him feel differently, but Quigley knew that he was
going to be arrested. Since Quigley's
"perception" had changed and he did not think he
was there freely anymore, Melichar said he would get a waiver
of constitutional rights form so that they could keep talking
about the case. Melichar left the room in order to get the
While Melichar was outside the interview room, he called
Quigley's probation agent and was informed that a hold
would be placed on Quigley.
Once Melichar returned to the interview room, he read Quigley
Miranda warnings from a form, which also contained
an acknowledgment and waiver of those rights. Melichar asked
Quigley if he understood everything that had been read to
him. Quigley asked if he was under arrest. Melichar responded
that if Quigley perceived that he was in custody, Melichar
was going to read the form "just to be on the safe side
and to make sure" that Quigley understood his rights
before Melichar asked him any other questions. Quigley
replied, "but isn't this … what they usually
read right before they arrest you?" Melichar could not
"really interpret" the form or give his
"explanation of what it is" because then he would
be getting "into kind of some legal stuff" that he
could not get into. Melichar continued, "[t]his is a
form informing you of your rights. I want to make sure you
understand your rights and before I ask any questions."
Quigley cut Melichar off, saying, "I understand my
rights, " and "[y]ou can just go ahead and tell me
if I'm being arrested." Melichar said he did not
know if Quigley was going to be arrested because he was still
investigating the case and did not know all the details,
although he thought it was "probably likely" that
he would be arrested. Quigley said he was not a lawyer, and
Melichar answered that neither was he. Melichar again asked
if Quigley understood the form that had been read to him, and
Quigley said that he did. Quigley refused to sign the
Miranda form, but he was willing to continue
Quigley asked if he could "step outside and have a
cigarette and wake" himself up. Melichar could not allow
that, but he offered to get Quigley a soda, to allow him to
use the restroom, and to walk back and forth in a larger
room. Quigley did not think it made sense that he was there
voluntarily but could not have a cigarette. Melichar
responded, "that's kind of changed … your
perception of you being here voluntarily [has] kind of
changed. And that changes things for me, too."
Then, when asked, Quigley denied that anyone had forced him
to come to the police station, that he had come of his own
free will, and that no one had made him do anything. Quigley
asked if he could have run out of McDonald's and never
come to the police station, and Melichar said, "[y]ou
sure could have."
Melichar informed Quigley that his probation officer had
elected to put a hold on Quigley. Quigley said he
"already knew that." Melichar told Quigley that
since Quigley was tired, Melichar would let him rest and
"sit tonight on a PO hold." Melichar said he would
interview Quigley again the next day. The entire interview
lasted one hour and twenty minutes.
Probation Department Interviews Quigley
The following day, March 15, 2012, Quigley spoke with a
probation officer. In that statement, Quigley admitted to
touching P.R.'s vagina and breasts and having her touch
his penis in February 2012. He also mentioned that his
"mouth [h]as been on her vagina and her mouth has been
on [his] penis." At the top of the statement that
Quigley wrote, he was advised that none of this information
could be used against him in criminal proceedings.
On March 26, 2012, the State filed the nine-count criminal
complaint in Kenosha County case No. 2012CF360.
Police Reinterview P.R.
On March 28, 2012, the Department of Corrections (DOC)
forwarded Quigley's statement to the Kenosha County
district attorney. In an affidavit from an assistant district
attorney, filed later in response to Quigley's motion to
suppress, the assistant stated that he directed Melichar to
interview P.R. again after the assistant received
Quigley's probation statement.
In August 2012, at the request of the district attorney,
Melichar interviewed P.R. again. P.R. stated that in October
2011, while at her mother's house, Quigley exposed his
penis to her and repeatedly asked her to touch it. In
November 2011, Quigley again exposed his penis, P.R. said,
and asked her to touch it. He also put his hand down
P.R.'s pants and touched her vagina. In December 2011, he
had P.R. touch his penis.
Following this interview, on August 6, 2012, the State
charged Quigley under Kenosha County case No. 2012CF884 with
first-degree sexual assault, sexual assault of a child under
sixteen years of age, and two counts of exposing genitals.
In October 2012, the State moved to join the two criminal
complaints. In doing so, the State noted that it had
requested that Melichar ask P.R. if any other incidents had
occurred because the "State suspected that there were
more incidents as [Quigley] described additional sexual
conduct to his probation agent."
Motion to Suppress P.R.'s Statements from the
Quigley moved to suppress the statement he gave to the DOC
and all the evidence that was derived therefrom, including
P.R.'s August 2012 statement, on the ground that the DOC
statement was compelled. The State conceded that
Quigley's statement to the DOC was compelled and should
be suppressed. Nevertheless, the State argued, P.R.'s
August 2012 statement should be admissible into evidence. In
an affidavit from an assistant district attorney, he said
that he would have asked Melichar to interview P.R. again
even without the DOC statement because P.R. seemed reluctant
to talk at first and children are generally prone to make
disclosures piecemeal. In addition, the incidents P.R.
related were wholly separate from those that Quigley related.
At a hearing on the motion to suppress, Melichar testified
that he interviewed P.R. again in August 2012 at the request
of the district attorney. However, Melichar believed that he
would have interviewed P.R. again anyway. He would have
followed up with P.R. because he did not think she had told
him the whole truth. He thought that she was holding things
back and that the passage of time would ...