Chapter 8: Self-Incrimination

Miranda and Waiver continued...

"God told me to confess to the murder" Colorado v. Connelly (1986) - Why is this not a Miranda violation given that confession was not of individual's "free will."

Chambers v. Florida (1940)

- 4 youths convicted of murder based on confessions. No physical force used but psychological pressure exerted (pro-longed questioning and denial of contact with outside world). Court agreed that 14th Due Process Rights Violated. - Psychological Force acknowledged by SC. Similar to Central Park 5 Case

The U.S. Constitution and Self-Incrimination

- Amendment: Stage of the Criminal Process Where It's Applicable - Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment due process clauses: All stages - Sixth Amendment right-to-counsel clause: All stages after formal charges - Fifth Amendment self-incrimination clause: Custodial interrogation and all following stages

Voluntariness and Due Process after Miranda

- Any statement given without coercion is considered voluntary. - A totality of circumstances approach is used to determine if coercive police activity overcame the defendant's will.

Sufficiency of Warnings (Miranda)

- Apply regardless of the nature or severity of the offense being investigated; - Must be completed before custodial interrogations; - Is inapplicable to civil proceedings; - Need not be given in exact form, as long as they are reasonably conveyed; - Must be completely given; and - Should be re-administered whenever there has been a break in the continuity of interrogation.

Brown v. MS (1936)

- Black man suspected of crime hanged from tree, denies guilt. Tied to tree and whipped, denies guilt. Later seized and whipped after which he confesses. Confession used to convict him. - S Court - Manner in which confession obtained violated 14th DPC. "The rack and torture may be substituted for the witness stand." - Incorporation, 14th due process clause applies 5th PASI to states in case of physical torture.

Congressional Power & Miranda

- Congress passed a law relieving cops of Miranda requirements. - Supreme Court in Dickerson (2000) held that Miranda Warnings required by Constitution therefore Congress does not have the authority to overturn via legislation

The Impact of Miranda

- Miranda has helped professionalize police conduct and improve their interrogation techniques. - Only voluntary admissions or confessions that are obtained in compliance with Miranda requirements are admissible in court.

Miranda NOT REQUIRED when:

- No Custody or No Questioning (by cops) - On-the-Scene Questioning - Routine Traffic Stops (Ex; Have you been drinking?). If placed under arrest or taken to station afterwards Miranda applies BERKEMER - Questions About Suspect's ID - Stop and Frisk - Questioning Witnesses Who Are Not Suspects - Lineups, Showups, Photo IDs - Statements Made to Private Individuals

The Fifth Amendment

- The Self-Incrimination Clause of the Fifth Amendment guarantees that no person "shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." - Silence at trial cannot be used against defendants.

Attachment of 6th Amend. Right to Counsel

- The Sixth Amendment right to counsel is triggered ("attaches") when formal criminal proceedings have begun. - Once attached, providing a defendant with Miranda warnings, coupled with informing the person that they have been formally charged with a crime, is sufficient to provide adequate notice to the person of his or her Sixth Amendment rights.

The Importance of Confessions and Interrogation

1. Many crimes would go unsolved without information gained through interrogations. 2. Unless caught in the act or interrogated in private, criminals don't confess. 3. Police have to use "less refined methods" (than normal daily police-citizen interaction) when they interrogate suspects.

Determining "Custody"

1. The location of the encounter and whether it was familiar to the suspect, or at least neutral or public; 2. The number of officers questioning the suspect; 3. The degree of restraint or force used to physically detain the suspect; 4. The duration and character of the interrogation, including the degree of psychological coercion used to detain the individual; 5. The language used to summon the suspect; 6. The extent to which the suspect is confronted with evidence of guilt; and 7. Whether the suspect initiated contact with the police.

Miranda Warnings

1. You have the right to remain silent. 2. Anything you say can be used against you in a court of law. 3. You have a right to the presence of an attorney. 4. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you prior to questioning. 5. You have the right to terminate this interview at any time (many depts require but constitution doesn't

False Confessions and Videotaping Interrogations

Although we know that there are false confessions, we do not know: - How often they occur - How often they lead to wrongful convictions - How much social harm they cause

Miranda and Appeal

Fulminante - Harmless Error. Even if the Trial Court erred in Admitting a Statement Obtained in Violation of Miranda or the Voluntariness Standard, the Conviction Will be Affirmed, and the Defendant Will Not Get a New Trial, if the Prosecution Can Show That the Error Was Harmless (did not affect the outcome of the trial). BUT FOR...

Statements Beyond Interrogation

Interrogation does not include: - Volunteered statements - Clarifying questions - Routine questions - Spontaneous questions - Questions related to public safety - Questioning by private citizens - Interrogations by undercover agents

Custodial Interrogation

Miranda doesn't command officers to warn suspects whenever they arrest them. They are required to only if they take suspects into custody and interrogate them. - Custody - situation in which a suspect is under arrest or deprived of freedom in a significant way - Interrogation - words or actions on the part of police that are likely to elicit an incriminating response

The Nature of Confessions

Suspects/Defendants confess or make incriminating statements in four different settings: 1. They confess to friends and associates, who report these statements to officials (SNITCHES). 2. They confess during police interrogations following their arrest/detention (TRAPPED). 3. They confess during plea bargaining or while pleading guilty (SCARED). 4. They confess during sentencing when making incriminating statements (REMORSE).

Constitution and PASI

The Framers ....created a federally protected right of silence and decreed that the law could not be used to pry open one's lips and make him a witness against himself.

Testimony

The government can't force defendants to give testimony against themselves—the meaning of "witness against himself." - Testimony is the content of what you say and write. - The Fifth Amendment protects testimony, not physical evidence (for example blood, hair samples, DNA evidence - Schmerber Case).

Brown and Due Process

Under Brown v. Mississippi's due process approach, involuntary statements violate the constitutional guarantee of due process because: - They are inherently untrustworthy, unreliable, and fundamentally unfair, and - They fail to respect a person's autonomy, rights to make free and rational choices.

Knowing and Intelligent

Waivers must be voluntary and knowing. Circumstances relevant to showing a this include: - Ability to understand English - Familiarity with the criminal justice system - Intelligence - Physical condition - Education - Mental condition - Age

The Due Process Approach

Wickersham Commission of 1931 - Torture and Rubber Hose Treatment Many early false-confession cases dealt with white mobs who had rounded up poor, illiterate blacks and tortured them until they confessed . The basic idea behind the due process approach to confessions is that confessions must be voluntary.

Interrogation

Words or actions on the part of police that are likely to elicit an incriminating response.

DP Approach

Between Brown in 1936 and Miranda in 1966 the Supreme Court threw out 40 state confessions because they violated DP. Most were poor, illiterate southern blacks rounded up by white mobs and tortured until they confessed.

RTC Approach

By 1958, four of nine justices were calling custodial interrogation a critical stage in criminal prosecutions. Escobedo v. Illinois (1964)— Escobedo in custody, requested to see lawyer, cops denied; lawyer went to jail, cops denied lawyer access to Escobedo. Escobedo made incriminating statements. The Court held that as soon as a police investigation focuses on a particular suspect, criminal prosecution begins and the right to counsel (6th) attaches.

Additional "Bright Line" Rules

There are five additional "bright line" rules for interrogating officer: 1. Interrogation has to stop immediately if suspects indicate at any time they don't want to talk further. 2. Interrogation has to stop immediately if a suspect indicates in any manner that they want a lawyer. 3. Any statement without a lawyer places a "heavy burden" on the government to prove defendants waived their right to remain silent and their right to a lawyer. 4. Statements obtained in violation of the rules can't be admitted into evidence. 5. Suspects can't be punished for asserting their right to remain silent.

Interrogation Rights

There are three approaches taken. 1. The Due Process Clauses of Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments—only voluntary statements, admissions, and confessions may be introduced 2. The Self-Incrimination Clause of the Fifth Amendment—procedural warnings (Miranda rights) must be given to a person prior to custodial interrogation 3. The Right to Counsel Clause of the Sixth Amendment—protects criminal defendants from making statements, admissions, or confessions without the presence and effective assistance of counsel after the initiation of formal criminal proceedings

Public Safety Exception

This exception typically applies when (1) the crime involved a gun; (2) the victim reported that the suspect had a gun; (3) the officer saw the suspect ditch the gun during pursuit; (4) the officer saw gun paraphernalia like an empty holster or ammo. Questions specifically related to PSE Where's the gun; Is the gun loaded; Are you carrying any other weapons.

Rationales for the Due Process Approach

Three rationales support this approach: 1. The reliability rationale - admitting unreliable evidence to prove guilt denies defendants the right to their lives, liberty, and/or property without due process of law. 2. The accusatory system rationale - forced confessions violate due process even if they're true; under our system, the government alone has the burden of proving guilt. 3. The "free will" rationale - because involuntary confessions are unreliable and contrary to the accusatory system of justice, all confessions are coerced if they're not "the product of a rational intellect and a free will."

Claiming a Fifth Amendment Self-Incrimination Violation

To claim successfully that their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination was violated, defendants have to prove three elements: 1. Compulsion "No person . . . shall be compelled . . ." 2. Incrimination " . . . in any criminal case" 3. Testimony "to be a witness against himself"

Waiver of Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel

To prove that a valid waiver of counsel for Sixth Amendment purposes, the prosecution must prove that: 1. The defendant was aware of the right to counsel, and 2. The defendant knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily relinquished the right.

The Self-Incrimination Approach

Two years after Escobedo, the Court shifted to the Fifth Amendment self-incrimination approach in Miranda v. Arizona (1966).