Kaplan Pgs 397-405 Statements And Confessions Flashcards
What is an involuntary statement?
When police subject the suspect to coercive conduct that is sufficient to overcome his will, given his particular vulnerabilities and the conditions of the interrogation. This is subjective and done on a case by case basis
If a statement is made by a suspect of average intelligence that is comfortable in his surroundings, is that likely to be considered voluntary or involuntary?
Voluntary
What are the four bases to exclude statements and confessions?
- voluntariness approach
– right to counsel approach
– Miranda standard
– fruits of illegal conduct
What are the constitutional bases for each of these approaches to exclude a statement or confession? - voluntariness approach – right to counsel approach – Miranda standard – fruits of illegal conduct
- voluntariness approach: due process from the fifth and 14th
– right to counsel approach: Sixth right to
– Miranda standard: fifth privilege against self-incrimination
– fruits of illegal conduct: fourth exclusionary rule
What does the voluntariness approach say for statements?
In order to be admissible a statement must be voluntarily made based on the totality of the circumstances
What is involved in the right to counsel approach to exclude statements and confessions?
If a statement is made during a critical stage of a criminal proceeding without an attorney present or a waiver, it is inadmissible
What is involved in the Miranda standard as a base to exclude statements and confessions?
If a statement is made without a Miranda warning during a custodial interrogation it is inadmissible
What is involved in the fruits of illegal conduct basis to exclude statements and confessions?
Even voluntary statements that is gotten as fruit of a prior illegal search or seizure is inadmissible
What are factors to determine if a statement was coerced?
- age – sex – education – mental and physical health – Physical abuse - death threats – promises of leniency
Do police have broad reign to trick and deceive a defendant during interrogation?
Yes
Although the police have broad reign to trick and deceive a defendant during interrogation, what are the things they cannot do?
Offer false promises of dropping charges in order to elicit a confession
If a defendant’s confession is coerced, can it be used at trial for direct evidence or impeachment?
No
If a confession was admitted at trial that ended up being involuntary, what happens?
It doesn’t result in automatic reversal, but instead the harmless error rule is applied. The government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the confession being entered into evidence did not contribute to the verdict of guilty
Once a suspect has invoked his sixth amendment right to counsel, can police continue to question him about other offences even if they are factually related to the charged crime?
Yes, because the sixth amendment is offence specific
If a suspect has invoked his sixth amendment right to counsel, when must counsel be present?
At all questioning until the accused waives the right
When someone asserts their sixth amendment right to counsel, what is not allowed?
Police deliberately eliciting incriminating statements from the defendant without his attorney present
If a police officer secretly records a suspect’s conversations while he’s out on bail, does that violate his right to counsel?
Yes
Why is passive listening by a cell mate informant not a violation of the right to counsel?
Because it must be shown that the police and their informant took some action beyond just listening that was designed to deliberately elicit incriminating remarks
What are the two things that can eliminate the privilege against self-incrimination?
If use or transactional immunity has been granted to the defendant
Can immunized testimony be used to impeach a defendant?
No, but it can be used to prove perjury
What does the Miranda test focus on?
The susceptibility of the suspect. If there are no objective indications of susceptibility, such as youth, then the police can talk in the presence of the suspect as long as they are not directly questioning him
What is “custody“ under Miranda?
When the suspect has been significantly deprived of his freedom of movement and cannot leave
What are objective factors to determine if a suspect is in custody for Miranda purposes?
- when and where it happened
– how long it lasted
– how many police officers were present
– what the officers and the defendant said and did
– the presence of physical restraints or its equivalent like a drawn weapon or a guard at the door
– if the defendant was being questioned as a suspect or a witness
Do subjective factors matter in determining if custody has occurred for Miranda?
No all that matters is whether the suspect experienced a significant deprivation of freedom of movement from an objective perspective