Baker argued Oney had not been read his Miranda rights and wasn't informed that his statements could be used against him in a trial, but the motion was denied.
In court documents added to the record Aug. 7, Circuit Judge David Tapp elaborated on why the motion was denied.
During one recorded police interview with Oney, Oney was not under arrest nor being held in custody, so the rules regarding Miranda rights were not in effect, Tapp wrote in his order.
"There were none of the traditional hallmarks that the defendant was under arrest or had any restraint whatsoever on his liberty," Tapp wrote. "The defendant was at his own residence, and voluntarily accompanied the officers to an unmarked car, that was not caged, and the defendant sat in the front seat.
"The officers were in plain clothes with firearms concealed. The defendant left the car after his interview, entered his residence and the officers left the location."
During a later interview, Oney had been arrested and an officer did interrogate him while he was in the back seat of a police car, Tapp wrote. But Oney initiated the conversation and the officer did attempt to make Oney aware of his rights, Tapp continued.
"Some of the statements of the officer were definitely for the purpose of eliciting incriminating statements. However, the court finds that the conversation with the officer was initiated by the defendant and in response the officer then sufficiently gave the defendant his Miranda warnings before continuing the conversation," Tapp wrote.
"The officer may not have quoted Miranda warnings word-for-word, but the officer successfully gave a warning that conveyed to the defendant (his Miranda rights)."
Oney signed a document pleading guilty to the amended charges against him on Friday. The final judgment against him had not yet been entered into the court record Tuesday.