Evidence Commons^™

The Future Of Confession Law: Toward Rules For The Voluntariness Test, Eve Brensike Primus

Michigan Law Review

Confession law is in a state of collapse. Fifty years ago, three different doctrines imposed constitutional limits on the admissibility of confessions in criminal cases: Miranda doctrine under the Fifth Amendment, Massiah doctrine under the Sixth Amendment, and voluntariness doctrine under the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. But in recent years, the Supreme Court has gutted Miranda and Massiah, effectively leaving suspects with only voluntariness doctrine to protect them during police interrogations. The voluntariness test is a notoriously vague case-by-case standard. In this Article, I argue that if voluntariness is going to be the framework for …

The Legality Of Deliberate Miranda Violations: How Two-Step National Security Interrogations Undermine Miranda And Destabilize Fifth Amendment Protections, Lee Ross Crain

Michigan Law Review

As part of the global “War on Terror,” federal agents intentionally delay issuing Miranda warnings to terrorism suspects during custodial interrogations. They delay the warnings presuming that unwarned suspects will more freely offer vital national security intelligence. After a suspect offers the information he has, agents administer Miranda warnings and attempt to elicit confessions that prosecutors can use at the suspect’s trial. No court has ruled on the constitutionality of this two-step national security interrogation process to determine whether admitting the second, warned confession is allowed under Miranda v. Arizona and its progeny. A fragmented Supreme Court examined two-step interrogations …

Empty Promises: Miranda Warnings In Noncustodial Interrogations, Aurora Maoz

Michigan Law Review

You have the right to remain silent; anything you say can be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney; if you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided to you at the state's expense. In 2010, the Supreme Court declined an opportunity to resolve the question of what courts should do when officers administer Miranda warnings in a situation where a suspect is not already in custody-in other words, when officers are not constitutionally required to give or honor these warnings. While most courts have found a superfluous warning to be …

Confusing The Fifth Amendment With The Sixth: Lower Court Misapplication Of The Innis Definition Of Interrogation, Jonathan L. Marks

Michigan Law Review

This Note examines how these courts have applied or misapplied Innis, and concludes that, while many of these decisions are consistent with Miranda and Innis, too many others are not. In order to evaluate these cases, it is first necessary to understand the meaning and significance of Innis. Part I thus considers Innis and its background. Part II then examines lower court decisions applying the Innis test, dividing these decisions into six groups based on the most common factual scenarios. Because the cases deal with factually specific police practices, this method constitutes the most useful way to …

Criminal Procedure--Self-Incrimination--Harmless Error--Application Of The Harmless Error Doctrine To Violations Of Miranda: The California Experience, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Using decisions of the appellate courts of California that have applied the federal harmless error rule to violations of Miranda v. Arizona and Escobedo v. Illinois, this Note will examine the logic and effects of the California application. However, the California experience can only be understood by first briefly describing the United States Supreme Court's decisions regarding harmless constitutional error and then showing the approaches taken by other states in their application of the harmless error rule to Miranda violations. Not only will this analysis put the California experience in its proper perspective, but it will also show the …

Federal Agency Investigations: Requirements For The Production Of Documents, Frank E. Cooper

Michigan Law Review

The United States district courts are frequently called upon to decide whether an administrative agency is entitled to enforcement of a subpoena requesting production of documentary evidence which the person to whom the subpoena is addressed assails as an unnecessary and improper inquisitorial investigation.

Neither the statute nor the decision-landmarks though they both are-offers a convenient rule of thumb to guide the district courts in the intensely difficult problems posed by requests for enforcement of administrative subpoenas.

However, an examination of the decisions passing upon such requests does disclose the standards by which the courts apply the three classic tests, …

Constitutional Law - Fifth Amendment - Right Of Defendant In Denaturalization Proceedings To Refuse To Testify, Theodore G. Koerner

Michigan Law Review

The United States as plaintiff instituted denaturalization proceedings alleging that deliberately false statements were made by defendant at the time of his naturalization. No "affidavit showing good cause" for such suit, required by section 340 (a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, was filed with the original complaint although one was filed with a later amended complaint. When plaintiff sought to take defendant's deposition pursuant to rule 26, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, defendant appeared for the examination but refused to be sworn. He was taken before the district court which directed that he be sworn, and he …

Compelling The Testimony Of Political Deviants, O. John Rogge

Michigan Law Review

Besides the two specific problems which the new federal act presents, namely, whether it imposes nonjudicial functions on federal courts, and whether it should, does and can protect against the substantial danger of state prosecution, there is a general objection that one can raise against it, and to other acts of the same type: they relate to the area of belief and opinion, the very area which was involved when the English people, spearheaded by the Puritans, engaged in the struggle with the Crown that finally resulted in the establishment of a right of silence. At least if we are …

Compelling The Testimony Of Political Deviants, O. John Rogge

Michigan Law Review

At the last term the United States Supreme Court in Ullmann v. United States upheld the constitutionality of paragraph (c) of a federal act of August 1954 which seeks to compel the testimony of communists and other political deviants. Paragraph (c) relates to witnesses before federal courts and grand juries. The Court specifically left open the question of the validity of paragraphs (a) and (b) relating to congressional witnesses. Justice Frankfurter delivered the Court's opinion. Justice Douglas, with the concurrence of Justice Black, wrote a dissent.

It is our purpose to consider the background, history and terms of this compulsory …

Constitutional Law - Privilege Against Self-Incrimination -Effect Of Immunity Statute, Paul A. Heinen S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Petitioner was brought before a federal grand jury and questioned as to his and other persons' membership in the Communist Party. After petitioner refused to answer the questions on the ground that the answers would be self-incriminating and therefore his refusal was privileged under the Fifth Amendment, the United States attorney, proceeding under the provisions of the Immunity Act of 1954, filed an application in the United States district court requesting that petitioner be required to answer the questions. The district court, upholding the constitutionality of the act, ordered petitioner to answer the questions, and petitioner's appeal from this order …

Constitutional Law - Grand Jury Under The Fifth Amendment Indictments Not Subject To Attack On Evidentiary Ground, Jerome K. Walsh, Jr. S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Defendant was indicted by a grand jury on four counts of willfully evading federal income taxes due for the years 1946, 1947, 1948 and 1949. His motion before trial to dismiss the indictment on the ground that he was firmly convinced that there could have been no legal or competent evidence before the grand jury was denied by the trial court. At the conclusion of the government's case, and again just before the case went to the jury, counsel for the defendant moved to dismiss the indictment on the ground that only hearsay evidence offered by three revenue agents had …

Criminal Law - Contradictory Statements Under Oath As Grounds For Perjury In The Federal Courts, Richard M. Adams S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Perjury has frequently been described as one of the more difficult convictions to obtain, and the truth of this saying is no better illustrated than in the case of Harvey Matusow. During the two years in which ex-Communist Matusow served as a professional government witness, he accused 180 or more persons as being members of the Communist Party or Communist sympathizers. This same witness has now described himself as a "habitual and perpetual liar" and has publicly admitted that all of his previous testimony was false. On the strength of this recantation, motions were filed for a new trial in …

Legislation - Witness Immunity Act Of 1954 - Constitutional And Interpretative Problem, George S. Flint S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

The passage in August, 1954 of a federal statute granting immunity under specified conditions to witnesses before congressional committees and in the federal courts marks a third legislative experiment designed to soften the effect of the Fifth Amendment as a limitation on the investigatory power of Congress. The first two attempts were less than successful. This comment will discuss the historical background of immunity legislation, and some possible constitutional pitfalls and problems of construction created by the statutory language.

Constitutional Law - Right To Effective Assistance Of Counsel In Federal Courts And Waiver Thereof, Richard M. Adams S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Indicted for illegal traffic in narcotics, petitioner and his trial counsel allegedly attempted to fabricate an alibi on the false testimony of petitioner's girl friend. The evidence indicated that on several occasions before trial, the girl was invited to the office of petitioner's attorney, given narcotics, and told to memorize certain false testimony to be used in petitioner's defense. Later the girl bad a change of mind and agreed to testify for the government Despite the strenuous objections of defendant's counsel, a description of this alleged fraud on the court was given in the prosecution's opening statement, and the witness …

What Constitutes A Fair Procedure Before The National Labor Relations Board, Clyde W. Summers

Michigan Law Review

No administrative body in recent times has received as much criticism, both favorable and unfavorable, as has the National Labor Relations Board in its administration of the National Labor Relations Act. Such a vast amount of material has been written on the procedure before the board that any further discussion would seem superfluous. However, the discussion of the board's procedure has been related more to the wisdom of choice which the board has made in setting up its procedure than to a determination of the line that separates legality from illegality in its determination of cases.

Evidence -The Possibility Of Incrimination In A State Jurisdiction Does Not Warrant The Assertion Of The Constitutional Privilege In Federal Proceedings

Michigan Law Review

On indictment for the refusal to give information requested by the authorized revenue agent, the appellee interposed a special plea averring that it would compel him to become a witness against himself in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the federal Constitution which reads, "nor shall any person be compelled to be a witness against himself." Held, the danger of incrimination in a state court was not grounds for asserting the constitutional privilege. United States v. Murdock, 284 U. S. 141, 52 Sup. Ct. 63, 76 L. ed. 83 (1931).