Difference between revisions of "Confessions"

From Criminal Defense Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 1: Line 1:
== Background ==
+
= Background =
 
Confessions that are obtained from defendants through torture, psychological duress, coercion or by any other non-voluntary method should be inadmissible as evidence against the defendant.
 
Confessions that are obtained from defendants through torture, psychological duress, coercion or by any other non-voluntary method should be inadmissible as evidence against the defendant.
  
== International Sources ==
+
= International Sources =
  
===International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights===
+
==International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights==
  
 
'''Article 14, Section 3''' -  
 
'''Article 14, Section 3''' -  
Line 16: Line 16:
 
**(g) Not to be compelled to testify against himself or to confess guilt.
 
**(g) Not to be compelled to testify against himself or to confess guilt.
  
== Examples of standards for the admissibility of confessions==
+
= Examples of standards for the admissibility of confessions=
  
===India===
+
==India==
 
No confession made to a police officer is valid as evidence at a trial. All confessions must be made to a Magistrate not below the rank of Judicial Magistrate. The Magistrate taking the confessions must give the accused due time out of the custody of the police, and make an effort to ensure that the accused was not coerced or intimidated in anyway, before receivint the confession. At the bottom of the confession the Magistrate must write out that he has informed the accused that this confession may be used against him and he is not obligated in any way to imcriminate himself.<ref>India Criminal Procedure Code Section 51</ref>
 
No confession made to a police officer is valid as evidence at a trial. All confessions must be made to a Magistrate not below the rank of Judicial Magistrate. The Magistrate taking the confessions must give the accused due time out of the custody of the police, and make an effort to ensure that the accused was not coerced or intimidated in anyway, before receivint the confession. At the bottom of the confession the Magistrate must write out that he has informed the accused that this confession may be used against him and he is not obligated in any way to imcriminate himself.<ref>India Criminal Procedure Code Section 51</ref>
  
===United States===
+
==United States==
 
'''Voluntariness Test'''  - In the United States, a confession is admissible if a judge deems it to have been made voluntarily. In [[Brown v. Mississippi, 297 U.S. 278 (1936)]],  the U.S. Supreme Court first excluded confessions procured and introduced in a state criminal case concluding that admission of the confessions would violate due process. The rule is grounded in three principals. First, exclusion of involuntary confessions tends to deter police misconduct. Second, a confession should be freely made by a rational person. Finally, confessions obtained with duress are inherently unreliable.  
 
'''Voluntariness Test'''  - In the United States, a confession is admissible if a judge deems it to have been made voluntarily. In [[Brown v. Mississippi, 297 U.S. 278 (1936)]],  the U.S. Supreme Court first excluded confessions procured and introduced in a state criminal case concluding that admission of the confessions would violate due process. The rule is grounded in three principals. First, exclusion of involuntary confessions tends to deter police misconduct. Second, a confession should be freely made by a rational person. Finally, confessions obtained with duress are inherently unreliable.  
  
Line 39: Line 39:
 
See [[Rights of the Accused]]
 
See [[Rights of the Accused]]
  
==Notes==
 
<references/>
 
  
==Notes==
+
 
 +
=Notes=
 
[references/]
 
[references/]

Revision as of 08:24, 27 July 2010

Background

Confessions that are obtained from defendants through torture, psychological duress, coercion or by any other non-voluntary method should be inadmissible as evidence against the defendant.

International Sources

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Article 14, Section 3 -

  • In the determination of any criminal charge against him, everyone shall be entitled to the following minimum guarantees, in full equality:
    • (a) To be informed promptly and in detail in a language which he understands of the nature and cause of the charge against him;
    • (b) To have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence and to communicate with counsel of his own choosing; **(c) To be tried without undue delay;
    • (d) To be tried in his presence, and to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing; to be informed, if he does not have legal assistance, of this right; and to have legal assistance assigned to him, in any case where the interests of justice so require, and without payment by him in any such case if he does not have sufficient means to pay for it;
    • (e) To examine, or have examined, the witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him;
    • (f) To have the free assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand or speak the language used in court;
    • (g) Not to be compelled to testify against himself or to confess guilt.

Examples of standards for the admissibility of confessions

India

No confession made to a police officer is valid as evidence at a trial. All confessions must be made to a Magistrate not below the rank of Judicial Magistrate. The Magistrate taking the confessions must give the accused due time out of the custody of the police, and make an effort to ensure that the accused was not coerced or intimidated in anyway, before receivint the confession. At the bottom of the confession the Magistrate must write out that he has informed the accused that this confession may be used against him and he is not obligated in any way to imcriminate himself.[1]

United States

Voluntariness Test - In the United States, a confession is admissible if a judge deems it to have been made voluntarily. In Brown v. Mississippi, 297 U.S. 278 (1936), the U.S. Supreme Court first excluded confessions procured and introduced in a state criminal case concluding that admission of the confessions would violate due process. The rule is grounded in three principals. First, exclusion of involuntary confessions tends to deter police misconduct. Second, a confession should be freely made by a rational person. Finally, confessions obtained with duress are inherently unreliable.

The admissibility of incriminating statements made at the time a defendant had his "rational intellect" and/or "free will" compromised by mental disease or incapacity is to be governed by state rules of evidence and not by the Supreme Court's decisions regarding coerced confessions and Miranda waivers. Also, coercive police activity is a necessary predicate to the finding that a confession is not "voluntary" within the meaning of the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment. [2]

When determining whether a confession was voluntary, the court should look at the "totality of the circumstances". [3] In certain circumstances, police misconduct may be so egregious that the confession evidence should be excluded without regard for how that conduct the defendant. However, when conduct is less egregious, a court should consider if the conduct actually induced an involuntary confession.

McNabb-Mallory Rule - A second line of cases in the U.S. Federal Courts holds that a confession obtained during Federal custody is inadmissible if the defendant is not promptly produced in court after arrest.[4] If argued under this line of cases, it is unnecessary to prove that the confession was, in fact, involuntary. It is enough to show that the police or prosecution unlawfully detained the suspect for a prolonged period, extracted a confession, and then attempted to use the confession against the defendant in court. See Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 5(a):

Rule 5. Initial Appearance

(a) In General. (1) Appearance Upon an Arrest. (A) A person making an arrest within the United States must take the defendant without unnecessary delay before a magistrate judge, or before a state or local judicial officer as Rule 5(c) provides, unless a statute provides otherwise. (B) A person making an arrest outside the United States must take the defendant without unnecessary delay before a magistrate judge, unless a statute provides otherwise.


See Rights of the Accused


Notes

[references/]

  1. India Criminal Procedure Code Section 51
  2. Colorado v. Connelly, 479 U.S. 157 (1987)
  3. Haynes v. Washington, 373 U.S. 503 (1963)
  4. McNabb v. United States, 318 U.S. 332 (1943), Mallory v. United States, 354 U.S. 449 (1957)