NCJ Number
62199
Journal
Vanderbilt Law Review Volume: 32 Issue: 5 Dated: (OCTOBER 1979) Pages: 1167-1213
Date Published
1979
Length
47 pages
Annotation
THIS LAW JOURNAL ARTICLE ARGUES THAT POLICE USE OF TRICKERY DURING INTERROGATONS TO ELICIT CONFESSONS FROM SUSPECTS IS A VIOLATION OF 14TH AMENDMENT DUE PROCESS.
Abstract
ALTHOUGH IN MIRANDA V. ARIZONA THE U.S. SUPREME COURT TRIED TO AMELIORATE THE 'INHERENTLY COERCIVE' NATURE OF POLICE CUSTODIAL INTERROGATION, SUSPECTS MAY BE INTERROGATED IF THEY WAIVE THEIR FIFTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS. IN PRACTICE, SUSPECTS OFTEN WAIVE THESE RIGHTS, AND INTERROGATIONS PROCEED AS THEY DID BEFORE MIRANDA. POLICE TRICKERY, OR THE ATTEMPT TO CONFRONT A SUSPECT WITH EVIDENCE OF HIS GUILT WHEN NONE EXISTS, IS ESPECIALLY COERSIVE AND SHOULD BE CURTAILED BECAUSE IT IS A VIOLATION OF 14TH AMENDMENT SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS. TRADITIONALLY, AMERICAN COMMON LAW HAS ADMITTED A CONFESSION INTO EVIDENCE IF IT IS RELIABLE, HENCE NOT OBTAINED THROUGH TORTURE, THREATS, OR PROMISES; THIS ALLOWS GREAT POLICE FREEDOM AND ABUSE. PRECEDENTS ARE CITED LIMITING THESE FREEDOMS OUT OF FAIRNESS TO THE DEFENDANT; THUS, VOLUNTARINESS AS WELL AS RELIABILITY SHOULD BE A TEST OF CONFESSION ADMISSIBILITY. HOWEVER, EVEN THE PRESENT VOLUNTARINESS TEST IS INADEQUATE IN THAT IT RELIES TOTALLY ON A SUSPECT'S STATE OF MIND AT THE TIME OF CONFESSION. THE ARTICLE MAINTAINS THAT COURTS SHOULD RULE THAT CERTAIN CONFESSION-EXTRACTING TACTICS ARE SO UNFAIR THAT THEY RENDER CONFESSIONS VIOLATIVE OF DUE PROCESS PER SE. THUS, A NEW DUE PROCESS VOLUNTARINESS STANDARD IS PROPOSED WHICH WOULD ELIMINATE TRICKERY. DISCUSSION COVERS FOUR DIFFERENT TYPES OF POLICE TRICKERY, THE POLICE VIEW OF INTERROGATION, STANDARDS FOR DETERMINING INTOLERABLE TRICKERY, AND SUGGESTIONS FOR RECOVERY IN TORT FOR CITIZENS SUBJECTED TO TRICKERY. FOOTNOTES ARE INCLUDED. (PAP)