When Miranda Warnings are not Required cont..

Chapter 12
Obtaining Statements and Confessions for
use as Evidence
Corpus Delicti Rule
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.
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
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.
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.
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
In looking at the “whole picture,” all of the
following factors are considered:
 Suspect Vulnerabilities
 Interrogating Factors
 Place of Questioning
 Use of the following safeguards…
The Miranda Requirements
 The
Miranda Requirements were
established by the U.S. Supreme
Court as part of the procedural
 They offer protection of the 5th
amendment right to not incriminate
oneself and…
 The 6th amendments right to counsel
The Miranda requirements:
 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 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
When Miranda Warnings are not
Miranda warnings are not required if the
person is not in custody
Miranda is not required when a person
volunteers information
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
When Miranda Warnings are not
Required cont..
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
Routine booking questions are exempt
from Miranda’s coverage
The Miranda warnings are not imposed
upon private persons who ask questions.
When Miranda Warnings are not
Required cont..
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.
 Undercover officers who are dealing
with suspects & informants
 Probation or parole officer
Public Safety Rule
NY v Quarles
 “Where’s the gun?” case
 Officers do not need to admonish
in cases of urgent public safety
 The statements can be used!
“Rescue Doctrine.”
 Similar
to the “Public Safety”
 “Where’s the Victim?” cases
 Focus is to save life, or
“rescue” a hostage, etc.
“Inevitable Discovery” Doctrine
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….
As a result, her body & other evidence was
used against Williams.
The Massiah Limitation
 Once
someone “INVOKES” their Sixth
Amendment right to an attorney, the
police cannot “violate” that right, by
continuing to question them.
 Following two cases:
 Massiah v. United States (1964)
 Brewer v. Williams (1977)
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.
 This is usually found in cases
where one or the other of the
suspects is in jail or prison
Alternatives to the Bruton Rule:
 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
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
 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.