NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

OPINION AND ORDER

KELLER, JUDGE:

Travis Jackson (Jackson) appeals from an order of the Barren Circuit Court denying his motion to suppress his statements made to the police. For the reasons set forth below, we vacate and remand for further proceedings.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

On November 25, 2008, the Barren County Grand Jury indicted Jackson for fifty counts of possession of matter portraying a sexual performance by a minor. On May 4, 2009, Jackson filed a motion to suppress. An evidentiary hearing was held on April 30, 2009, at which the trial court heard testimony from Detective Rusty Anderson (Detective Anderson) of the Barren County Sheriff's Office and Jackson.

At the suppression hearing, Detective Anderson testified to the following. In the summer of 2007, he received a call from Pastor David Pitcock (Pastor Pitcock) of the ADO house2 regarding child pornography found on a computer. Jackson was residing at the ADO house at the time. After receiving the phone call, Detective Anderson went to the ADO house. At the ADO house, Pastor Pitcock logged onto the computer Jackson used and showed Detective Anderson some of the images there. Detective Anderson then went to the place where Jackson was working and asked Jackson to come to the Barren County Sheriff's office. Detective Anderson told Jackson that, once they arrived at the sheriff's office, he would tell Jackson the reason why he wanted to speak with him. Jackson consented, and because he did not have a vehicle, he agreed to ride in the backseat of the police car. Detective Anderson testified that Jackson was free to leave.

Detective Anderson further testified that when they arrived at the sheriff's office, he read Jackson his Miranda3 rights, and Jackson signed a waiver of rights form and agreed to an interview. Detective Anderson then explained to Jackson why he was there and began interviewing Jackson. When Jackson began to make an admission that he was responsible for the child pornography found on the computer, Detective Anderson asked Jackson if he could record his statement. Jackson responded to this question by stating, "I think I might want an attorney." Detective Anderson then told Jackson, "That is fine. That is your right." Detective Anderson then got up to leave and told Jackson, "We are just trying to help you. If you don't want help, that's fine." Jackson then told Detective Anderson to wait, and asked what he meant by "help." Detective Anderson said, "No, you need an attorney. You asked for an attorney." Jackson then responded by stating, "No. No. I don't want an attorney. How can you help me?"

Detective Anderson testified that he then read Jackson his Miranda rights again and asked Jackson if he still wanted to talk. Jackson stated that he did. Detective Anderson then recorded Jackson's statement wherein he admitted to looking at the child pornography found on the computer.

Detective Anderson also testified that Jackson was interviewed for approximately an hour before he recorded Jackson's statement. Detective Anderson testified that he did tell Jackson he was potentially facing ten years' imprisonment, and that a reduced sentence was never offered to Jackson if he cooperated.

At the hearing, Jackson testified to the following. Detective Anderson arrived at his workplace sometime between 5 and 6 p.m. and stated that he would like to speak with Jackson at the sheriff's office. When he asked what it was regarding, Detective Anderson stated that he would tell him once they arrived at the sheriff's office. Because Jackson did not own a vehicle, Detective Anderson and the other Deputy who was present offered to transport him. Jackson testified that it took approximately ten to twelve minutes to get to the sheriff's office.

Jackson further testified that when they arrived at the sheriff's station, Detective Anderson read him his Miranda rights, and he signed a form waiving those rights. He testified that he did not feel free to leave once they told him that there were images on the computer at the ADO house and that people had seen him looking at them. He further testified that he brought up the issue of having an attorney present a couple of times. The last time was right before Detective Anderson asked him to make a recorded statement, and that he responded by stating that he thought he should talk to an attorney before he made a statement. Jackson testified that Detective Anderson responded by stating, "We've tried to help you. You don't want to cooperate with us." Jackson testified that throughout the interview and prior to asking him to make a recorded statement, Detective Anderson told him that if he cooperated, he would make sure that he served two years in prison instead of ten. Jackson then offered to make a statement. Jackson testified that it was approximately eight o'clock when he made his recorded statement.

The trial court denied the motion to suppress in an order entered on May 18, 2009. On May 22, 2009, Jackson entered a conditional guilty plea to fifty counts of possession of matter portraying a sexual performance by a minor. Jackson's plea bargain reserved the right to appeal the trial court's order denying his motion to suppress. On July 28, 2009, the trial court entered a final judgment of conviction and sentenced Jackson to five years' imprisonment on each conviction with the sentences to run concurrently, and imposed a $1,000 fine. This appeal followed.

On August 4, 2010, the Commonwealth filed a motion to remand this matter for findings of fact by the trial court. By order of this Court entered on September 13, 2010, the Commonwealth's motion was passed to this panel for consideration of its merits.

Standard of Review

As provided in Commonwealth v. Jones, 217 S.W.3d 190, 193 (Ky. 2006):

(Footnotes omitted).

ANALYSIS

On appeal, Jackson argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress statements made to the police during a custodial interrogation after he invoked his right to counsel.

We cannot address Jackson's arguments because, as raised by the Commonwealth in its motion, we must remand this matter. Pursuant to Kentucky Rule of Criminal Procedure (RCr) 9.78, following an evidentiary hearing on a motion to suppress, a trial court "shall enter into the record findings resolving the essential issues of fact raised by the motion or objection and necessary to support the ruling." Unfortunately, the trial court did not indicate the facts it relied upon in making its decision. The written order merely states the following: "The Court, after reviewing the record, considering the testimony at the hearing, written arguments and being sufficiently advised, does hereby DENY the Motion to Suppress." Thus, it is impossible to determine whether the trial court believed that Jackson's interview amounted to a custodial interrogation, whether Jackson unequivocally invoked his right to counsel, and whether Jackson, after requesting an attorney, reinitiated his conversation with Detective Anderson. In the absence of these required factual findings, we are unable to conduct a meaningful review of the issues presented. Commonwealth v. Neal, 84 S.W.3d 920, 925 (Ky. App. 2002); Hebert v. Commonwealth, 566 S.W.2d 798, 800 (Ky. App. 1978).

Therefore, without speaking to the merits of the arguments presented on appeal, we GRANT the Commonwealth's motion to the extent that we are vacating the trial court's order and remanding this matter for further proceedings. On remand, the Barren Circuit Court shall enter factual findings supporting its resolution of the suppression motion.

ISAAC, SENIOR JUDGE, CONCURS.

CLAYTON, JUDGE, CONCURS IN RESULT ONLY.