Due Process Limits

Question 1

In re Roger G. (Cal. Ct. App. 1975)

Answer 1

A confession is deemed involuntary and hence inadmissible if procured by an express or implied promise of benefit beyond that naturally flowing from truthful statement, or by an express or implied threat that the failure to make a statement will result in consequence adverse to the suspect. Conversely, a confession is deemed voluntary and hence admissible if obtained in response to exhortation to tell the truth, unaccompanied by express or implied promises or threats.

Question 2

U.S. v. Tingle (9th Cir. 1981) (interrogating officer implied (by saying that she would actually get to see her 2-year-old son again) that she would get a lighter sentence if she confessed.)

Answer 2

Because the interrogating officer suggested that she wouldn’t be able to see her two-year-old son, implying that if she confessed, her sentence would be more lenient, the statement was coerced.

Officers cannot make promises to induce confessions

Question 3

Colorado v. Connelly (S. Ct. 1986) (Under the Due Process Clause, is a statement made by a mentally ill person involuntary and therefore inadmissible even if there was no coercion by police?)

Answer 3

Under the Due Process Clause, a statement may only be deemed involuntary and therefore inadmissible if there was coercion by police.

Police action is required

Question 4

Arizona v. Fulminate (S. Ct. 1991)

Answer 4

A confession is not necessarily a product of coercion where the police expressly or implicitly promise leniency in exchange for the suspect’s cooperation:

Lower courts have determined that some types of promises of leniency will render a confession involuntary, eg assurances that some of the charges will be dropped or that the D will receive a reduction in punishment.
 However, standing alone, courts rarely invalidate a confession based on a mere promise by the police to bring the defendant’s cooperation to the prosecutor’s attention, or a promise that an officer will discuss leniency in exchange for a confession, without in fact making any assurances as to results.
–EG: ok to tell suspect that a confession could be helpful to the suspect and that prosecution will take D’s cooperation into account.

Bottom line: If it’s something the officer can actually do, then it is alright.