5th Amendment

Question 1

Hector v. State

Answer 1

Tortured confessions are involuntary and therefore inadmissible

Question 2

Brown v. Mississippi

Answer 2

States can regulate criminal procedure but they cannot violate the Constitution

The torture chamber is not the witness stand

Question 3

Lisenba v. CA

Answer 3

A confession after two days is not a violation of due process because it did not meet the threats, promises, or acts of physical violence

Question 4

Things required for an involuntary confession before Spano

Answer 4

Threats
Promises
Acts of physical violence

Question 5

Spano v. NY

Answer 5

A confession made after interrogations without counsel is is not voluntary when looking to the intent of the confession was to prove guilt, not solve the crime

Reversed Lisenba

Question 6

Why suppress involuntary confessions?

Answer 6

1) Prevent unreliable evidence from reaching the jury
2) Prevent the use of statements taken from overbearing police pressure
3) Prevent statements taken with minimal mental freedom

Question 7

Bram v. U.S.

Answer 7

Confessions must be voluntary

Courts must err in favor of the defendant

Question 8

Shock the conscience

Answer 8

Can only sue under 1983 claims if the involuntary confession “shocks the conscience”

example: Chavez v. Martinez - shot in the fact then taken to the police headquarters

Question 9

Miranda Warnings

Answer 9

You have the right to remain silent
Anything you say can be used against you
You have the right to an attorney
If you cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed for you
Do you understand?
Do you wish to continue?

Question 10

Miranda analysis

Answer 10

1) is there a custodial interrogation?
2) Is the person in custody?
3) was there an interrogation?
4) was there a Miranda violation?
5) waiver?
6) did the violation have fruits?
7) exception?

Question 11

Miranda v. Arizona

Answer 11

Custodial interrogations are threatening and apply against self incrimination

Prosecution bears the burden of proving the accused has waived the rights in the warnings

Once the Miranda rights are invoked, the interrogation must stop

Question 12

Why are custodial investigations damaging?

Answer 12

No communication
Psychological tactics to manipulate
Trickery
No support
Atmosphere carried badge for intimidation

Question 13

Schmerber v. California

Answer 13

DUI blood samples are not self-incriminating testimony

Question 14

Lie detectors and self-incrimination

Answer 14

Most courts do not allow them in because of their reliability

Elicit testimony, up to the standards of reliability

Question 15

Oregon v. Mathiason

Answer 15

Police may lie during a polygraph about finding the suspect’s finger print but it is a fact-sensitive, totality-of-the-circumstances inquiry

Question 16

Berkemer v. McCarty

Answer 16

Police must issue a Miranda warning before ALL custodial investigations

Roadside pull overs do not require the Miranda

Test: what would the reasonable person belive in that instance and think is occurring?

Question 17

JDB v. North Carolina

Answer 17

First, what were the circumstances surrounding the interrogation; and

Second, given those circumstances, would a reasonable person have felt he or she was at liberty to terminate the interrogation and leave

The age of a child subjected to police questioning is relevant to whether the child is in custody under Miranda.

Question 18

Rhode Island v. Innis

Answer 18

Interrogation depends on what actions or words are done by the police to reasonably elicit incriminating statements

Includes playing to the sympathies of the defendant

Question 19

North Carolina v. Butler

Answer 19

During a custodial interrogation, a suspect need not specifically waive his right to counsel but may do so implicitly through his actions and words

Look at the particular facts and circumstances surrounding a case and the suspect’s waiver to determine if it was knowingly and voluntarily made

Question 20

Berghuis v. Thompkins

Answer 20

Where a defendant does not invoke his right to remain silent after fully understanding his Miranda rights, he implicitly waives his Miranda rights by making a voluntary statement to the police

Question 21

Edwards v. Arizona

Answer 21

Once there has been a valid request of counsel, a valid waiver of the right cannot be established by only that the suspect responded to further police custodial interrogations, even if they were advised of their rights again

No communications with police after the counsel has been requested

Question 22

New York v. Quarles

Answer 22

There is a public safety exception for the requirement of Miranda (emergency situations only regarding public safety)

Question 23

Oregon v. Elstad

Answer 23

If a confession is first given without Miranda rights, the second is permissible after rights are signed

First does not ruin the second

Question 24

Missouri v. Siebert

Answer 24

Police cannot use the tactics in Elstad to circumvent Miranda

Question 25

Dickerson v. U.S.

Answer 25

Congress cannot overrule a SCOTUS decision interpreting the Constitution

Question 26

5th amendment

Answer 26

No person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself

No person should be deprived