Statements, Confessions, and Identifications

Question 1

Four Bases To Exclude Statements and Confessions

Answer 1

Voluntariness
Right to Counsel
Miranda Rule
Fruits of Illegal Conduct

Question 2

What is the Due Process Voluntariness Standard?

Answer 2

A statement obtained by police as the result of actual coercion that overbears the free will of the suspect is inadmissible: for any purpose – not even impeachment

Voluntariness standard is assessed based on the: totality of the circumstances

Question 3

When is the right to counsel triggered?

Answer 3

The initiation of formal adversarial process (formal charge, indictment, arraignment, or preliminary hearing) triggers the Sixth Amendment right to the assistance of counsel during all critical stages of the adversarial process.

Question 4

Scope of right to counsel?

Answer 4

Only protects defendants (not suspects)
Offense Specific
Only once you have been formally charged

Question 5

Right to Counsel

Answer 5

The deliberate elicitation of a statement from a defendant (someone who has been formally charged) is inadmissible unless defense counsel was present or police obtain a knowing and voluntary waiver.

Was counsel present? If not, did defendant waive? If yes, was it knowing and voluntary?

Question 6

The 5th Amendment Privilege Against Self-Incrimination (PASI)

Answer 6

Any person called to testify in any proceeding (trial, grand jury, preliminary hearing, administrative hearing, legislative hearing, court-martial, etc.) has an absolute privilege to refuse to testify when:

He has a real and substantial fear that his testimony will result in self incrimination or contribute to his criminal conviction in the United States

Question 7

The government can supplant the PASI by granting:

Answer 7

Immunity

Use or Transactional

Question 8

Miranda Rule

Answer 8

Statements obtained as the result of custodial interrogation are inadmissible in the prosecution case-in-chief in the absence of Miranda warnings and valid waiver.

Other evidence is admissible.

Question 9

When is Miranda triggered?

Answer 9

Custody + Interrogation

Question 10

Custody is…

Answer 10

Formal arrest, or a situation where a reasonable person in the suspect’s position would believe their freedom has been deprived to a degree analogous to formal arrest (functional equivalent of formal arrest)

Custody requires an objective indication that police are initiating criminal process, for EXAMPLE being taken to the station for booking.

Question 11

Interrogation is:

Answer 11

direct questioning or words or actions a reasonable officer would anticipate were likely to result in eliciting an incriminating response

Question 12

Limitations to Miranda Rule

Answer 12

Does not trigger Fruit of Poisonous Tree
Public Safety Exception
Statements can be used for Impeachment

Question 13

Waiver of Miranda Rule

Answer 13

Must be knowing and voluntary

The waiver must indicate the suspect understood the rights, and engaged in a course of conduct indicating a voluntary waiver

Question 14

Miranda warnings need not be repeated because of a

Answer 14

short break or because a new police officer begins questioning – but if its been overnight or a couple of days, then you must repeat the Miranda warning

Question 15

If a suspect makes an unequivocal request for an attorney or that she wishes to remain silent:

Answer 15

All interrogations must cease immediately

Question 16

To resume questioning after an invocation of Miranda rights…

Answer 16

Police must allow for: a significant period of time to elapse

Obtain: a new Miranda waiver

Question 17

The Due Process Standard for Identifications

Answer 17

Any lineup, show-up, or photo identification will be inadmissible as violative of due process when the identification is unnecessarily suggestive and likely to produce an irreparable mistaken identification

Question 18

When does a defendant have a right to counsel at lineups?

Answer 18

After formal charges are filed

Question 19

Out of Court Identifications vs. In Court Identifications

Answer 19

The inadmissibility of a previous out-of-court identification made at a lineup, based on a violation of the defendant’s right to counsel, does not bar the witness from making an in-court identification of the accused at trial when the prosecution can clearly and convincingly show that the subsequent identification stemmed from an independent, “purging” source

Question 20

When an out-of-court identification is excluded because it violates due process a subsequent in court identification by the same witness will be

Answer 20

excluded as fruit of a poisonous tree