Law Commons^™

The Second Founding And Self-Incrimination, William M. Carter Jr.

Northwestern University Law Review

The privilege against self-incrimination is one of the most fundamental constitutional rights. Protection against coerced or involuntary self-incrimination safeguards individual dignity and autonomy, preserves the nature of our adversary system of justice, helps to deter abusive police practices, and enhances the likelihood that confessions will be truthful and reliable. Rooted in the common law, the privilege against self-incrimination is guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment’s Self-Incrimination and Due Process Clauses. Although the Supreme Court’s self-incrimination cases have examined the privilege’s historical roots in British and early American common law, the Court’s jurisprudence has overlooked an important source of historical evidence: the …

You Have The Right To Remain Silent, And It Can And Will Be Used Against You: Addressing Post-Arrest Pre-Miranda Silence, Maria P. Hirakis

Touro Law Review

The right to remain silent has long been recognized by the Supreme Court as requiring a high degree of protection. Since Miranda v. Arizona was decided in 1966, procedural safeguards have been put in place to inform individuals of this right upon arrest. Yet, a gray area exists when it comes to the use of an individual's silence post-arrest. It may surprise some that a point in time exists when an individual has not yet been read their Miranda rights post-arrest. Several circuit courts have taken the position that any silence that follows arrest but precedes the reading of Miranda …

The Protection Of Free Choice And The Right To Passivity: Applying The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination To Physical Examinations And Documents' Submission, Rinat Kitai-Sangero

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article addresses the question of whether the privilege against selfincrimination should cover physical examinations as well as the obligation to submit documents. This question requires a serious examination of the justifications underlying the privilege against self-incrimination and is of particular relevance in the current age of technological progress that expands the powers assigned to law enforcement agencies to access knowledge and thoughts stored in individuals’ minds. After addressing the comparative law regarding the applicability of the privilege against selfincrimination to physical examinations and to the obligation to submit documents and discussing key justifications for the privilege against self-incrimination, dividing …

Why Do We Admit Criminal Confessions Into Evidence?, David Crump

Seattle University Law Review

There is an enormous literature about the admissibility of criminal confessions. But almost all of it deals with issues related to self-incrimination or, to a lesser extent, with hearsay or accuracy concerns. As a result, the question whether we ever admit criminal confessions into evidence has not been the subject of much analysis. This gap is odd, since confessions are implicitly disfavored by a proportion of the literature and they often collide with exclusionary doctrines. Furthermore, the self-incrimination issue sometimes is resolved by balancing, and it would help if we knew what we were balancing. Therefore, one might ask: Why …

Clarifying The Scope Of The Self-Incrimination Clause: City Of Hays V. Vogt, Samantha Ruben

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Three months after oral arguments, the Supreme Court dismissed the writ of certiorari in City of Hays v. Vogt as improvidently granted. The question in Vogt was whether the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination is violated when incriminating statements are used at a probable cause hearing, as opposed to a criminal trial. As a result of the “DIG,” the Court left a circuit split unresolved surrounding the meaning of a “criminal case” within the Fifth Amendment’s Self-Incrimination Clause.

This note argues that the Supreme Court should not have dismissed Vogt and should have decided that the Fifth Amendment right against …

Taking The Fifth: How The Tenth Circuit Determined The Right Against Self-Incrimination Is "More Than A Trial Right" In Vogt V. City Of Hays, Daniel J. De Cecco

Pepperdine Law Review

In Vogt v. City of Hays, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit ruled that the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination is more than a trial right and applies to the use of compelled statements in probable cause hearings as well as in criminal trials. While the Self-Incrimination Clause states that the right applies “in a criminal case,” there is a circuit split regarding the definition of a “criminal case.” The Tenth Circuit joined the Second, Seventh, and Ninth Circuits in finding that the right against self-incrimination applies to more than a trial, relying on the common …

"I Plead The Fifth": New York's Integrated Domestic Violence Courts And The Defendant's Fifth Amendment Dilemma, Rhona Mae Amorado

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Mitya Karamazov Gives The Supreme Court An Onion: The Role Of Confessions, Amy D. Ronner

Mercer Law Review

Part II summarizes seminal United States Supreme Court confession cases. The Court has a longstanding hate-love relationship with confessions: while it believes that such evidence can valuably assist the truth-finding process, it has at times questioned its reliability and mistrusted coercive methods used for extraction. The Court's express goal under the Due Process Clause and Miranda v. Arizona is to ensure that confessions are the product of a free and rational choice. Although the Sixth Amendment and accompanying case law explicitly aim to protect the integrity of the adversarial process, freedom and rationality also (but more subtly) undergird the reasoning. …

United States V. Patane: The Beginning Of The End Of Miranda, Bryce Chauncey Loveland

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Appellate Division, Third Department, People V. Smith, Jennifer Belk

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court, New York County, Hughes V. Farrey, Eric Pack

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Right Of The Prosecutor To Advance Notice Of The Defendant's Alibi Defense , Thomas J. Hickey

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Discovery By The Prosecution In Criminal Cases: Prudhomme Reconsidered , Jon R. Rolefson

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Sanctity Of The Attorney-Client Relationship – Undermined By The Federal Interpretation Of The Right To Counsel - People V. Borukhova, Tara Laterza

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Court Of Appeals Of New York - People V. White, Rosalinde Casalini

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Davis V. United States: "Maybe I Should Talk To A Lawyer" Means Maybe Miranda Is Unraveling, Tom Chen

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

New York’S Grant Of Greater Fifth Amendment Rights To Sexual Predators In Somta Proceedings - New York V. Suggs, Lina R. Carbuccia

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Fifth Amendment Right Against Self-Incrimination: An In-Depth Look At Mckune V. Lile, Heidi Feldman

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

You Have The Right To Remain Silent. Now Please Repeat Your Confession: Missouri V. Seibert And The Court's Attempt To Put An End To The Question-First Technique, Eric English

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

"What Hath Hiibel Wrought?": The Constitutionality Of Compelled Self-Identification, Robert A. Hull

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

International Travel With A "Digital Briefcase": If Customs Officials Can Search A Laptop, Will The Right Against Self-Incrimination Contravene This Authority?, Ashley H. Verdon

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

State V. Burgess: A Limitation On A Defendant’S Right To Remain Innocent, Elizabeth Lahey

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “This note will explore the current state of the privilege against self-incrimination, particularly in regard to whether it works to bar negative inferences from being drawn from a defendant’s silence during sentencing in order to determine his remorse for the crime of which he has been convicted. I will focus primarily on the issue in the context of the recent New Hampshire case State v. Burgess. In that case, the court recognized the application of the privilege at sentencing, but nonetheless carved out a unique exception which made negative inferences permissible at sentencing when the defendant has admitted to …

Declining To State A Name In Consideration Of The Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause And Law Enforcement Databases After Hiibel, Joseph R. Ashby

Michigan Law Review

In response to a report of an argument on a public sidewalk, a police officer approaches two people standing in the vicinity of the reported dispute. The officer requests that each person provide her name so the officer can run the names through databases to which the police department subscribes. After searching each name through various databases, the officer might discover that one of the individuals made several purchases of cold medicine containing pseudoephedrine and that the other just received a license from the State to procure certain hazardous chemicals. These two people might be in the early stages of …

The Electronic Recording Of Criminal Interrogations, Roberto Iraola

University of Richmond Law Review

Should law enforcement officers be required to record, by video or audiotape, custodial interrogations of suspects? If so, how much, the entire interrogation or just the confession? Many prosecutors and police departments maintain that a recording requirement will hamper law enforcement and discourage suspects from talking. Proponents of this measure argue that the recording of interrogations protects against false confessions, augments the effective administration of justice, and serves to improve the relationship between the public and the police.

This article generally examines the developing case law on this question. Because of the incriminating nature of confessions, the article, by way …

A Jurisprudence Of Doubt: Missouri V. Seibert, United States V. Patane, And The Supreme Court's Continued Confusion About The Constitutional Status Of Miranda, Johnathan L. Rogers

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Every Breath You Take, Every Move You Make, I'Ll Be Watching You: The Use Of Face Recognition Technology, Bridget Mallon

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Improving The Kangaroo Courts: A Proposal For Reform In Evaluating Juveniles' Waiver Of Miranda, Kimberly Larson

Villanova Law Review

No abstract provided.

Cowboy Prosecutors And Subpoenas For Incriminating Evidence: The Consequences And Correction Of Excess, Robert P. Mosteller

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Separated At Birth But Siblings Nonetheless: Miranda And The Due Process Notice Cases, George C. Thomas Iii

Michigan Law Review

Paraphrasing Justice Holmes, law is less about logic than experience. Courts and scholars have now had thirty-four years of experience with Miranda v. Arizona, including the Court's recent endorsement in Dickerson v. United States last Term. Looking back over this experience, it is plain that the Court has created a Miranda doctrine quite different from what it has said it was creating. I think the analytic structure in Dickerson supports this rethinking of Miranda. To connect the dots, I offer a new explanation for Miranda that permits us to reconcile Dickerson and the rest of the post-Miranda doctrine with the …

Constitutional Law: United States V. Balsys: Setting A Boundary For The Self-Incrimination Clause, Melinda S. Blackman

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.