5th Amendment Flashcards
Hector v. State
Tortured confessions are involuntary and therefore inadmissible
Brown v. Mississippi
States can regulate criminal procedure but they cannot violate the Constitution
The torture chamber is not the witness stand
Lisenba v. CA
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
Things required for an involuntary confession before Spano
Threats
Promises
Acts of physical violence
Spano v. NY
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
Why suppress involuntary confessions?
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
Bram v. U.S.
Confessions must be voluntary
Courts must err in favor of the defendant
Shock the conscience
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
Miranda Warnings
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?
Miranda analysis
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?
Miranda v. Arizona
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
Why are custodial investigations damaging?
No communication
Psychological tactics to manipulate
Trickery
No support
Atmosphere carried badge for intimidation
Schmerber v. California
DUI blood samples are not self-incriminating testimony
Lie detectors and self-incrimination
Most courts do not allow them in because of their reliability
Elicit testimony, up to the standards of reliability
Oregon v. Mathiason
Police may lie during a polygraph about finding the suspect’s finger print but it is a fact-sensitive, totality-of-the-circumstances inquiry
Berkemer v. McCarty
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?
JDB v. North Carolina
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.
Rhode Island v. Innis
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
North Carolina v. Butler
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
Berghuis v. Thompkins
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
Edwards v. Arizona
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
New York v. Quarles
There is a public safety exception for the requirement of Miranda (emergency situations only regarding public safety)
Oregon v. Elstad
If a confession is first given without Miranda rights, the second is permissible after rights are signed
First does not ruin the second
Missouri v. Siebert
Police cannot use the tactics in Elstad to circumvent Miranda
Dickerson v. U.S.
Congress cannot overrule a SCOTUS decision interpreting the Constitution
5th amendment
No person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself
No person should be deprived
