CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - ADMISSIBILITY OF CONFESSIONS DANCING ON THE GRAVE OF MIRANDA - COMMONWEALTH V MAHNKE, - MASS -, 335 N E 2D 660 (1975), CERT, DENIED, 96 S CT 1974 (1976)

• NCJ Number: 37238
• Journal: Suffolk University Law Review Volume: 10 Issue: 4 Dated: (SUMMER 1976) Pages: 1141-1178
• Author(s): S A GHETTI
• Date Published: 1976
• Length: 38 pages
• Corporate Author: Suffolk University
• Publication Format: Article
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

REVIEW OF THE MASSACHUSETTS SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT RULING IN COMMONWEALTH V MAHNKE (1975) UPHOLDNG A LOWER COURT DECISION ALLOWING THE USE OF A CONFESSION OBTAINED BY VIGILANTES WITHOUT MIRANDA WARNINGS AS TRIAL EVIDENCE.

Abstract

IN MAHNKE, THE STATE COURT REJECTED THE DEFENDANT'S CONTENTION THAT THE FAILURE OF HIS KIDNAPPERS TO APPRISE HIM OF HIS MIRANDA RIGHTS REQUIRED SUPPRESSION OF HIS STATEMENTS MADE TO THEM, HOLDING THAT MIRANDA IS APPLICABLE ONLY WHEN AN INTERROGATION IS INITIATED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS. THE COURT RULED THAT ADMISSIBILITY WAS GOVERNED BY THE DUE PROCESS STANDARD OF VOLUNTARINESS. THE AUTHOR EXAMINES PRE- AND POST-MIRANDA SUPREME COURT DECISIONS ESTABLISHING STANDARDS OF ADMISSIBILITY FOR STATEMENTS MADE BY CRIMINAL DEFENDANTS, NOTING A TREND AWAY FROM MIRANDA'S PER SE EXCLUSIONARY RULE BACK TO THE TRADITIONAL FIFTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT STANDARDS OF TRUSTWORTHINESS AND VOLUNTARINESS. IT IS CONCLUDED THAT THIS RETURN TO DETERMINING ADMISSIBILITY BY THE DUE PROCESS STANDARD OF VOLUNTARINESS IS INEVITABLE, AND A RECOMMENDATION IS MADE TO DELINEATE GUIDELINES FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES TO FOLLOW DURING INTERROGATION AS PART OF THE STATE LAW.