21. Voluntary Statements under the 14th Amendment

Question 1

The most decisive evidence in a criminal case comes from the MOUTH of the accused. What are the 2 types of incriminating statements (admissions)?

Answer 1

1. The SPOKEN admission.
2. The ADOPTIVE admission. (statement made in the presence of the suspect, with suspect response, whether orally by gesture, or by revealing silence, indicates its acceptance)

Question 2

When a suspect hears and understands a statement

Has an opportunity to respond

The context is one in which he would have been expected to respond to an accusation, his SILENCE may be considered what?

Answer 2

AN ADOPTIVE ADMISSION

Question 3

When a person is under arrest and is given Miranda, can an investigator use it against the arrestee who does not deny an investigator’s statement about his involvement in a crime?

Answer 3

No, a person who exercises his right to remain silent ENDS the possibility adoptive admission.

Question 4

The law governing police interaction stems from what 3 constitutional principles?

Answer 4

V-Voluntary Statements

W-Warnings during custodial interrogation

N-No interference with attorney client relationship

Question 5

The 14th amendment voluntary test:

Answer 5

Is the statement voluntary? (the court will consider the following):

1. Whether the interaction was coercive.
2. Did the characteristics of the suspect make him susceptible to coercion.

Question 6

The ___ amendment and article ___ of the Mass. Declaration of Rights require that the circumstances of an interrogation produce what?

Answer 6

14th Amendment
Article 12

Produce VOLUNTARY statements.

Question 7

What are the consequences of a statement?

Answer 7

1. If it was involuntary, it may not be introduced at trial.
2. If it was voluntary, the next consideration is whether Miranda applies.

Question 8

Fifth amendment and Miranda issues, state action:

Who obtained the statements?

Answer 8

Miranda does not cover communications by a private individual, (unless he’s a police agent). Miranda does not apply to private citizens between other private citizens.

Miranda does cover communications to a police officer, quasi law enforcement, official or agent .

Question 9

Miranda warnings are required to protect the suspect’s privilege against self-incrimination when a police official is doing what?

Answer 9

C-Custodial Situations
I-Interrogates Suspect
T-Testimonial Evidence

The police have the suspect in a custodial situation for the purpose of interrogating him to obtain testimonial evidence.

If any of the above CIT is missing the officer does not have to advise the accused of his Miranda rights.

Question 10

C-Custodial Situations
I-Interrogates Suspect
T-Testimonial Evidence

If any of the above are present, then an officer must consider what?

Answer 10

The proper administration of rights: were the Miranda rights properly -

Administered by the officer, and;

Waived (given up) by the accused or;

Invoked (Used) and then waived by the accused.

Question 11

In considering the proper administration of Miranda rights, what three things must be taken into account?

Answer 11

First and foremost were they administered?

Second were they waived?

Third were they invoke, and then waved by the accused?

Article 12, right to council .

Question 12

What is a critical requirement of the 14th amendment?

(Due process clause)

Answer 12

A defendant statement must be voluntary. These two items must be taken into consideration to determine:

1. The speaker must have been rational.
2. The speaker must not have been coerced into making a statement.

Question 13

What is the voluntary statement test requirement for the 14th amendment?

Answer 13

Voluntary? Ask:

Rational?
Not coerced

First was the speaker, rational?

Second, the speaker must not have been coerced into making its statements.

Question 14

The rational speaker (14th Amendment)

Answer 14

The vast majority of interview suspects are rational. The main disputes usually centers on whether their statements were coerced.

A statement is involuntary made by an irrational speaker with severe mental illness, intoxication, injury, or other condition .

Question 15

Determining coercive statements by the police

Answer 15

Courts will consider the totality of the circumstances. Other than that there is no clear test to determine whether a suspect was coerced into making a statement.

The court must scrutinize all of the surrounding circumstances.

1. How did the police behave?
2. What are the characteristics of the suspect?

Question 16

Coercive statement? questions to ask:

Answer 16

P-Police Behavior
S- Suspect Characteristics

1. What was the police behavior?
2. What are the suspect characteristics?

P.S. thank you courts for considering this.

Love,
the police.

Question 17

The police behavior and how they communicate with a suspect determines whether his statement is voluntary.

Answer 17

Physical coercion and flagrant mistreatment is unacceptable.

Making a suspect lie naked on the floor of the bathroom handcuff with a gun to his face is obviously unacceptable and example of physical coercion.

This statement is involuntary.

Question 18

Police coercion is not only limited to physical force. What else is coercive?

Answer 18

Direct and indirect threats.

Legitimate pressure is OK. Remember the case of the guy who had cocaine in the oven mitt and police threatened to charge his mother since they both had access to that area of the kitchen. This was OK.

Question 19

If a suspect has decided to speak & waive Miranda, am I able to use tricks, tactics, and misrepresentations?

Answer 19

Providing false information may be permissible if that is the ONLY questionable police tactic. Do not use formatting, and never trick a suspect into waving his Miranda (Richard Jewell example).

Never use an offer of leniency to pressure a suspect to confess.

Do not blatantly misrepresent the defendants legal predicament.

Question 20

Never promise a specific legal outcome however, you may pressure an individual on the following

Answer 20

Reasonable psychological pressure or religious appeals are permissible.

Question 21

Before I question somebody am I obligated to tell them that they are a suspect?

Answer 21

No, but if you do inform this person they are a suspect, a court is more likely to conclude the suspect spoke voluntarily, because he understood the consequences of cooperation

Question 22

If investigators respond to a suspect legal question, they must provide accurate information.

Answer 22

Example: investigator told a suspect that being an accomplice was like playing in a football game, where all the players act towards a common purpose, the court found that this was accurate, and did not mislead the suspect.

Question 23

During an interrogation, these are the things an officer must never do:

Answer 23

Mislead a suspect about the need for a lawyer. (see the Groome case, SP S. Yarmouth).

Tell a suspect that if he calls an attorney “all deals are off”.

Tell a suspect that police are legally obligated to tell the truth (this was misleading since the law permits officers, to, at times, misrepresent the strength of their evidence).

Imply that a statement to police is the only way a defendant will be able to present his side to the jury.

Question 24

Is it permissible for the police to promise not to arrest their suspect at the end of an interview

Answer 24

Yes

Question 25

Police may implicate another agencies informant as long as they do not do what?

Answer 25

As long as they do not mislead him.

Question 26

Suspect characteristics in involuntary interrogations, some other things to consider:

Answer 26

Suspect age. Age is a major factor, because younger people are more prone to suggestion and police coercion.

Education. An accused person with minimal education may be susceptible to coercion.

Intelligence. Someone with the intelligence may be susceptible.

Mental illness. A mentally ill person is vulnerable. Police must be careful.

Disability. Officers must be sensitive to any disability that may affect whether the cues can comprehend or communicate.

Language proficiency. Police must ensure that the suspecting adequately speak English or provide translation services. (record the interview with an interpreter, unless it is unpractical at the time).

A person’s experience with the justice system. A persons history with the criminal justice system is relevant.

Self protection. If the accused has the presence of mine, to refuse to answer, certain questions, or to a certain himself other way, he’s probably not intimidated.

Physical condition. An injured or ill suspect is more vulnerable. Also alcohol or drug intoxication. This is important in evaluating whether he spoke freely.

Question 27

All statements against accused must be this:

Answer 27

Voluntary.

In Massachusetts this is known as the “human practice rule”. The judge must conclude that the defendant statement were voluntary beyond a reasonable doubt, then instruct the jury that it must be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the accuse voluntarily in order to consider any of the statements.

Question 28

Massachusetts prohibits any involuntary statement even ones to a private citizen.

Answer 28

Remember the case of the family that dragged a murder suspect into the woods and interrogated him in a cabin, and got him to confess.

The SJC ruled that even though the confession were made to private citizens not acting as police agents, the statements were admissible.

This is an example where under all circumstances statements must be voluntary even to the non-Police out there.

Question 29

In Massachusetts can a conviction be based solely on a defendants, uncorroborated confession?

Answer 29

No, there must be some evidence, besides a confession that the criminal act was committed by someone and not imaginary.