Chapter 6 Interrogations and Confessions

1
Chapter 6 Interrogations and Confessions

• Grounds for excluding confession not admissible
  if it is product of police violation of any of
  following requirements
• Free and voluntary rule
• 4th Amendment restrictions on investigatory
  stops, arrests and searches
• Miranda safeguards of 5th Amendment privilege
  against self incrimination during custodial
  interrogation
• 6th Amendment right to counsel

2
Free and Voluntary Rule

• Confessions are not voluntary and will be
  suppressed when 1) an agent of the government
  exerts pressure that 2) overcomes a suspects
  free will and cause the suspect to make a
  statement that he would not otherwise have made.

3
Due Process Free and Voluntary Rule

• A. Improper pressures exerted by government
• Physical force or threat of force
• False promises
• Trickery, deceit, or psychological coercion
• NOTE Where deranged man believed that Gods
  voice had ordered him to confess, Supreme Court
  said confession OK because it was obtained
  without improper police conduct

4
Free and Voluntary, contd.

• B. Impact of interrogation methods
• Physical force or threats of force render
  confession involuntary as matter of law
• When pressures are less extreme, two other
  factors
• Suspects susceptibility to pressure
• Interview environment
• Arizona v Fulminante
• Prosecution has burden of proof and must prove by
  preponderance of evidence confession was
  voluntary

5

• Factors Considered in Determining Voluntariness
  Beating and torture render confessions
  involuntary as matter of law. When pressures are
  not this extreme, courts consider totality of
  circumstances, with emphasis on
• The pressure exerted by the police
• The suspects degree of susceptibility
• The conditions under which interrogation took
  place

6
Fourth Amendment Exclusionary Rule

• Exclusionary rule requires suppression of
  confessions if they are a) causally connected to
  b) police violation of suspects 4th Amendment
  rights
• 4th Amendment violations triggering exclusionary
  rule include illegal Terry stops, illegal
  arrests, and illegal searches
• Must be causally related to violation of suspects
  4th Amendment rights.

7
4th Amendment violation, contd

• Causal connection courts will look at a) length
  of time between the violation and confession and
  b) presence of intervening circumstances, e.g
  consulting attorney or voluntarily returning to
  police station
• Derivative evidence When confession is tainted
  by 4th Amendment violation, the taint carries
  over to derivative evidence, Fruit of Poisonous
  Tree Doctrine

8
Overview of Custodial Interrogation

• After suspect in police custody, two additional
  requirements
• Prompt arraignment statutes
• Miranda rule

9
5th Amendment Privilege Against
Self-Incrimination During Police Interrogation

• Custody interrogation Miranda
• Miranda Rule imposes three separate duties
• Warn suspect of his 5th Amendment rights
• Secure a knowing, intelligent, voluntary waiver
  before questioning
• Cease interrogation if suspect wants to remain
  silent or consult with attorney

10
Dickerson v United States

• Issue whether Miranda decision established a
  judicially created rule of evidence forbidding
  admission of unwarned confessions or a
  constitutional right.
• Held, Miranda warning requirement was
  constitutionally based and Congress cannot
  override it by statute.

11
Custodial Interrogation Defined

• Custody exists when the objective circumstances
  surrounding an encounter would cause a reasonable
  person in suspects shoes to experience the
  situation as an arrest. Factors that might create
  arrest-like atmosphere include
• prolonged questioning, isolated surroundings,
  threatening presence of several police, display
  of weapons, physical touching, accusatory
  attitude, language indicating compliance might be
  compelled, handcuffs or physical restraint,
  telling person he is prime suspect.

12

• To be considered in custody, suspect must be
  aware interrogator is police officer. Miranda not
  required for interrogation by undercover agent or
  informant.
• However, use of undercover agent or informant to
  elicit incriminating statements from accused
  after formal charges have been filed is 6th
  Amendment violation

13

• Suspects not in custody during Terry stops,
  therefore, no Miranda required. See Berkemer v
  McCarty.
• Note Difference between seizure (when reasonable
  person in suspects shoes would not feel free to
  leave) and custody (whether reasonable person in
  suspects shoes would experience encounter as an
  arrest).

14
Interrogation Defined

• Includes both express questioning and functional
  equivalent. Functional equivalent refers to
  words or actions on part of police (other than
  those normally attendant to arrest and custody)
  that police should know are reasonably likely to
  elicit an incriminating response from suspect.

15
Express Questioning

• Volunteered statements without an interrogation
  are admissible despite lack of Miranda
• Miranda not required for routine booking
  questions
• Miranda not required before fingerprinting,
  photographing, lineups, breathalyzer,
  blood-alcohol tests, field sobriety tests, etc.
  These do not involve custodial interrogations.

16
Functional Equivalent of Express Questioning

• Words or actions on part of police that they
  should know are reasonably likely to elicit an
  incriminating response.
• Rhode Island v Innis While two officers
  transporting Innis to police station after his
  arrest, engage in conversation between themselves
  concerning missing shotgun. Held, statement not
  made in response to interrogation

17

• Public Safety Exception Police may delay
  Miranda warnings when they are confronted with an
  emergency that requires immediate action to
  protect public safety or their own safety. Benson
  v State Police ask how much crack he had eaten,
  Benson said one rock. Held, public safety
  exception applies not only to questions asked out
  of objectively reasonable concern for public
  safety, but also for objectively reasonable
  concern for suspects safety.

18
Procedural Requirements for Custodial
Interrogations Miranda Warnings

• You have right to remain silent
• Anything you say can and will be used against you
  in court of law
• You have right to consult with attorney and have
  attorney present during questioning
• If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be
  appointed for you prior to questioning

19
Waiver

• After Miranda warnings are given, officer must
  obtain a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary
  waiver of suspects Miranda rights before
  questioning may begin.

20
Cessation of Questioning

• Even after an initial waiver, suspect remains
  free to assert right to remain silent or to speak
  with an attorney at any point during the
  interview. After suspect makes a clear and
  unambiguous assertion of either right, all
  questioning must cease immediately. However,
  police may ignore ambiguous or equivocal
  assertion and not required to clarify.

21
Resumption of Questioning

• After suspect makes clear and unambiguous request
  for attorney, police may not thereafter question
  suspect about any offense until counsel is
  present unless suspect initiates further
  communication.
• After clear and unambiguous assertion of right to
  remain silent, police may not question suspect
  about the same offense unless suspect initiates
  further communication. Police may initiate
  questioning about unrelated offense after waiting
  a sufficient period of time.

22
Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel During
Interrogations After Formal Charges are Filed

• Sixth Amendment attaches when adversary judicial
  proceedings are formally initiated by way of
  preliminary hearing, indictment, information, or
  arraignment. Arrest, with or without warrant,
  does not trigger 6th Amendment right to counsel.
• Once 6th Amendment has attached, police may not
  deliberately elicit incriminating statements from
  an accused about the charged offense unless
  counsel is present or accused makes a valid
  waiver of 6th Amendment right to counsel

23

• Sixth Amendment right to counsel is
  offense-specific. Applies only when police
  interrogate accused about the charged offense
  they do not apply when police interrogate an
  accused about a separate, uncharged offense.
  However, if accused is in custody when
  interrogation about unrelated offense, must be
  Mirandized.

24
Accuseds ability to waive Sixth Amendment right
to counsel

1. Once accused has retained or requested appointed
   counsel, subsequent waiver given during
   police-initiated contact is ineffective. Michigan
   v Jackson.
2. Accused who has not yet retained or requested
   appointed counsel is capable of making valid 6th
   Amendment waiver of right to counsel during
   police-initiated contact.
3. No restrictions on ability to waive 6th during
   contact accused initiates.

25
Undercover agents and informants

• Using undercover agents or informants to elicit
  incriminating statements from an accused after
  formal charges have been filed is a violation of
  Sixth Amendment right to counsel.

26
Use of Inadmissible Confessions for Impeachment

• Inadmissible confession may be used for
  impeachment if the following conditions are met
• Defendant takes stand to testify on own behalf
• He tells jurors different story than what he told
  police.
• Confession offered for impeachment was given
  voluntarily.

27
Restrictions on Use of Derivative Evidence

• Fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine requires
  suppression of evidence derived from confessions
  obtained in violation of due process free and
  voluntary requirement, Fourth Amendment search
  and seizure clause, and Fifth Amendment privilege
  against self-incrimination, and Sixth Amendment
  right to counsel will result in suppression of
  derivative evidence.

28

• Evidence derived from confessions obtained
  without Miranda warnings, in contrast, is
  admissible if the confession was voluntary and
  the violation of the Miranda rule was not
  deliberate. See Missouri v Seibert.
• Prosecution cant introduce the unwarned
  statement in its case-in-chief, but can admit
  derivative evidence discovered as a result of the
  statement.

29
Restrictions on Use of Confessions Given by
Accomplices

• Defendant lacks standing to object to use of
  accomplices confession as evidence against him
  on grounds that police violated accomplices
  constitutional rights to obtain the confession.
  Only person whose constitutional rights have been
  invaded has standing to object to admission to
  confession on grounds that it was obtained in
  violation of Constitution.

30

• Sixth Amendment guarantees that accused shall
  have right to confront witnesses against him.
  This guarantee precludes the government from
  introducing a confession given by one accomplice
  implicating another as evidence against the
  latter unless the government can prevail on the
  accomplice who made the statement to appear at
  trial and testify.

31
Requirement of Corroboration of Valid Confession

• Many states impose statutory restriction on
  admission of confessions called corpus deliciti
  or independent proof requirement. Prosecution
  must put on at least some evidence, independent
  of the confession, that the crime confessed was
  in fact committed before a confession will be
  received into evidence.