5th Amendment Flashcards
5th Amendment. The 5th Amendment provides
that no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself. A defendant who wishes to invoke his 5th Amendment right does so by simply not taking the stand.
Custodial Interrogations.
Under Miranda, any incriminating statement obtained as a result of custodial interrogation (i.e., suspect is in custody and subject to police interrogation) may NOT be used against the suspect at a subsequent trial UNLESS the police informed the suspect of his Miranda rights.
Custodial. A person is in custody when he reasonably believes that he is NOT
free to leave (e.g., in the back of a police cruiser).
Interrogation. A person is subject to an interrogation when the police know or should know that their words or actions are likely to elicit an incriminating response. Miranda does NOT protect volunteered statements, as they are, by definition, not the product of interrogation.
Miranda Rights. When a person is in custody, the police MUST
inform the person of her Miranda rights before subjecting her to a police interrogation. This includes informing the subject:
She has the right to remain silent;
Any statement she makes may be used against her in court;
She has the right to consult an attorney and to have the attorney present during questioning; AND
She has the right to have an attorney appointed if she cannot afford one.
Miranda Waiver
Waiver. A defendant may knowingly and voluntarily waive his Miranda rights. The burden is on the government to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that the waiver was made knowingly and voluntarily.
Invocation of Miranda
Invocation. The police MUST cease their interrogation if either of the following occurs:
The party being questioned affirmatively invokes her right to remain silent;
After a substantial period of time, police can go back to the suspect, give Miranda warnings again, and seek to interrogate her further.
OR
The party being questioned affirmatively invokes her right to counsel.
The interrogation cannot resume until the lawyer is present, the suspect reinitiates the interrogation, or 14 days have passed since the suspect was released from custody.
Miranda Violations. A statement obtained in violation of Miranda is
inadmissible in the prosecution’s case-in-chief, BUT can be admitted to impeach the defendant.
Evidence obtained from a voluntary statement taken in violation of Miranda is admissible.
Miranda is violated if:
The police fail to give Miranda warnings before a custodial interrogation;
OR
The police fail to cease interrogation of a person after she has affirmatively invoked her right to remain silent or her right to counsel.
Example. The police have a person in custody they suspect has committed murder. The police fail to give the suspect any Miranda warnings before interrogating her. During the interrogation, she voluntarily confesses to the murder and reveals the location of the murder weapon that she used to commit the crime. The admissibility of each piece of evidence is as follows:
The Murder Confession. The murder confession is inadmissible in the prosecutor’s case-in-chief, because the suspect was not given proper Miranda warnings. However, the confession may be used for impeachment purposes to attack her credibility at trial.
The Murder Weapon. The murder weapon is admissible, because evidence obtained from voluntary statements, even if in violation of Miranda, is admissible.
Note: if obtained by force, trickery, or false promises renders statements involuntary, so if murder weapon obtained htrough involuntary statements, NOT admissible.
Exceptions. There are three main exceptions to the Miranda requirement.
The police are NOT required to give Miranda warnings before questioning a suspect:
When the public’s safety is at risk;
When the suspect being questioned is not aware that the interrogator is a police officer (e.g., undercover police officers);
OR
If the questioning is biographical for routine booking purposes.
Miranda and the Harmless Error Rule.
If evidence in violation of Miranda is admitted at trial, a guilty verdict will be upheld if the prosecution can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the error was harmless because the defendant would have been convicted even without the tainted evidence.
Interrogation Tactics and the 5th Amendment
The 5th Amendment protects against government compulsion of involuntary statements. Statements are involuntary only if the police coerced the defendant into making the statements.
To determine whether a statement was coerced by the police, courts look at the totality of the circumstances. Relevant factors include:
The length of the interrogation;
The time and location where the interrogation took place;
Police tactics used;
Force. The application of force or threats of force made by the police to the person being interrogated renders any statements made during the interrogation involuntary.
Trickery. Trickery or false promises made by the police to the person being interrogated may render their statements involuntary. However, deceit or fraud by the police (i.e., lying about an accomplice’s confession) does not itself make a statement involuntary.
AND
The character of the person being interrogated (e.g., age, experience, state of health, education level, sophistication, intoxication, mental condition, etc.)
An involuntarily obtained statement is
NOT admissible against a defendant for substantive purposes or for impeachment purposes.
Evidence obtained from an involuntary statement is fruit of the poisonous tree and is presumptively inadmissible.
Does 5th amendment apply to physical, non-communicative evidence?
NO SIR.
So for instance if cops make D write out a note to compare with note written by bank robber, that can be admissible into the court as evidence, even if not given opportunity to obtain counsel or given Miranda.
Also applies to other physical, non-communicative evidence such as blood sample and fingerprint
During the investigative stage of prosecution, the fifth amendment entitles the suspect to counsel for
custodial questioning (under Miranda), when a defendant must take part in a lineup or show up after ‘‘formal proceedings’’ have begun, or undercover agents elicit incriminating statements from an already indicted suspect.
Note: The Sixth Amendment covers ‘‘critical stages’’ of the trial (e.g., arraignment and trial).
