1 Chapter 12 Obtaining Statements and Confessions for use as Evidence Obtaining Statements and Confessions for use as Evidence

2 Corpus Delicti Rule In using a confession as evidence, corroborating evidence must also be provided to prove the Corpus Delicti In using a confession as evidence, corroborating evidence must also be provided to prove the Corpus Delicti I.e., that a crime was committed and the defendant is culpable. I.e., that a crime was committed and the defendant is culpable. This requirement originated in England, was developed solely “to protect the defendant against the possibility of fabricated testimony which might wrongfully establish the crime and the perpetrator.” This requirement originated in England, was developed solely “to protect the defendant against the possibility of fabricated testimony which might wrongfully establish the crime and the perpetrator.”

3 Requirement that confessions and incriminating statements be voluntary It has never been held that interrogations by police are per se unconstitutional. The voluntariness test used today requires that confessions and admissions by a suspect must be voluntarily and freely given. It has never been held that interrogations by police are per se unconstitutional. The voluntariness test used today requires that confessions and admissions by a suspect must be voluntarily and freely given. If the police or a prosecutor obtain a confession or an incriminating admission by means that overbears the will of the accused, that statement or confession cannot be used as evidence. If the police or a prosecutor obtain a confession or an incriminating admission by means that overbears the will of the accused, that statement or confession cannot be used as evidence.

4 Totality-of-the-circumstances test In determining whether a confession or a statement may be used as evidence, courts use the totality-of-the-circumstances test. In determining whether a confession or a statement may be used as evidence, courts use the totality-of-the-circumstances test. In looking at the “whole picture,” all of the following factors are considered: In looking at the “whole picture,” all of the following factors are considered: Suspect Vulnerabilities Suspect Vulnerabilities Interrogating Factors Interrogating Factors Place of Questioning Place of Questioning Use of the following safeguards… Use of the following safeguards…

5 The Miranda Requirements The Miranda Requirements were established by the U.S. Supreme Court as part of the procedural safeguards. The Miranda Requirements were established by the U.S. Supreme Court as part of the procedural safeguards. They offer protection of the 5 th amendment right to not incriminate oneself and… They offer protection of the 5 th amendment right to not incriminate oneself and… The 6 th amendments right to counsel The 6 th amendments right to counsel

6 The suspect must be told of his or her right to remain silent The suspect must be told of his or her right to remain silent That anything he or she says may be used against him or her in a court of law That anything he or she says may be used against him or her in a court of law That he or she is entitled to the presence of an attorney and That he or she is entitled to the presence of an attorney and If he or she can not afford an attorney one will be appointed to represent him or her If he or she can not afford an attorney one will be appointed to represent him or her The Miranda requirements:

7 When Miranda Warnings are not Required Miranda warnings are not required if the person is not in custody Miranda warnings are not required if the person is not in custody Miranda is not required when a person volunteers information Miranda is not required when a person volunteers information This includes spontaneous declarations This includes spontaneous declarations General on-the-scene questioning as to facts surrounding a crime or other general questioning of citizens in the fact-finding process do not require a Miranda admonishment General on-the-scene questioning as to facts surrounding a crime or other general questioning of citizens in the fact-finding process do not require a Miranda admonishment

8 Miranda is not required for investigative detentions (stop and inquiry) based upon reasonable suspicion to believe that the person is committing, has committed or is about to commit a crime. Miranda is not required for investigative detentions (stop and inquiry) based upon reasonable suspicion to believe that the person is committing, has committed or is about to commit a crime. Miranda is not required in “ ordinary traffic stops” Miranda is not required in “ ordinary traffic stops” Routine booking questions are exempt from Miranda’s coverage Routine booking questions are exempt from Miranda’s coverage The Miranda warnings are not imposed upon private persons who ask questions. The Miranda warnings are not imposed upon private persons who ask questions. When Miranda Warnings are not Required cont..

9 The Miranda requirements have been held not to be applicable in the following cases: The Miranda requirements have been held not to be applicable in the following cases: To offenders who are on probation or parole, such as sex offenders, etc. who are required to “be truthful” or risk revocation. To offenders who are on probation or parole, such as sex offenders, etc. who are required to “be truthful” or risk revocation. Undercover officers who are dealing with suspects & informants Undercover officers who are dealing with suspects & informants Probation or parole officer Probation or parole officer

10 Public Safety Rule NY v Quarles NY v Quarles “Where’s the gun?” case “Where’s the gun?” case Officers do not need to admonish in cases of urgent public safety and… Officers do not need to admonish in cases of urgent public safety and… The statements can be used! The statements can be used!

11 “Rescue Doctrine.” “Rescue Doctrine.” Similar to the “Public Safety” doctrine Similar to the “Public Safety” doctrine “Where’s the Victim?” cases “Where’s the Victim?” cases Focus is to save life, or “rescue” a hostage, etc. Focus is to save life, or “rescue” a hostage, etc.

12 “Inevitable Discovery” Doctrine See Brewer v Williams, 430 U.S. 387, page 217 of your text See Brewer v Williams, 430 U.S. 387, page 217 of your text The text doesn’t include the “rest of the story” that although the court rejected the evidence obtained by the police questioning, (this is also referred as the “Christian Burial” case), since search parties were closing in on where the victim was found (dead), her body would have “inevitably” been discovered…. The text doesn’t include the “rest of the story” that although the court rejected the evidence obtained by the police questioning, (this is also referred as the “Christian Burial” case), since search parties were closing in on where the victim was found (dead), her body would have “inevitably” been discovered…. As a result, her body & other evidence was used against Williams. As a result, her body & other evidence was used against Williams.

13 The Massiah Limitation Once someone “INVOKES” their Sixth Amendment right to an attorney, the police cannot “violate” that right, by continuing to question them. Once someone “INVOKES” their Sixth Amendment right to an attorney, the police cannot “violate” that right, by continuing to question them. Following two cases: Following two cases: Massiah v. United States (1964) Massiah v. United States (1964) Brewer v. Williams (1977) Brewer v. Williams (1977)

14 The Bruton Rule A Bruton violation occurs if a confession by one suspect is used against another suspect unless the second suspect has an opportunity to cross-examine the source of the accusation against him or her. A Bruton violation occurs if a confession by one suspect is used against another suspect unless the second suspect has an opportunity to cross-examine the source of the accusation against him or her. This is usually found in cases where one or the other of the suspects is in jail or prison This is usually found in cases where one or the other of the suspects is in jail or prison

15 Try to get one of the suspects to become a state witness and incriminate him or herself and the other suspects Try to get one of the suspects to become a state witness and incriminate him or herself and the other suspects If the suspect does not want to become a state witness, drop all charges against the others and proceed to trial against that person If the suspect does not want to become a state witness, drop all charges against the others and proceed to trial against that person Alternatives to the Bruton Rule:

16 Polygraph Test Results and Voice Stress Analyzers as Evidence Persons charged or suspected of a crime cannot be ordered to take a polygraph test (lie detector) or VSA Persons charged or suspected of a crime cannot be ordered to take a polygraph test (lie detector) or VSA Why? Why? Because such compulsion would violate their Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. Because such compulsion would violate their Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. Nor does a defendant charged with a crime have a right to take a polygraph or VSA test to prove his or her innocence. Nor does a defendant charged with a crime have a right to take a polygraph or VSA test to prove his or her innocence.