Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 10 of 10

Full-Text Articles in Law

Confessions In An International Age: Re-Examining Admissibility Through The Lens Of Foreign Interrogations, Julie Tanaka Siegel Jan 2016

Confessions In An International Age: Re-Examining Admissibility Through The Lens Of Foreign Interrogations, Julie Tanaka Siegel

Michigan Law Review

In Colorado v. Connelly the Supreme Court held that police misconduct is necessary for an inadmissible confession. Since the Connelly decision, courts and scholars have framed the admissibility of a confession in terms of whether it successfully deters future police misconduct. As a result, the admissibility of a confession turns largely on whether U.S. police acted poorly, and only after overcoming this threshold have courts considered factors pointing to the reliability and voluntariness of the confession. In the international context, this translates into the routine and almost mechanic admission of confessions— even when there is clear indication that the confession …


Mental Sanity And Confessions: The Supreme Court's New Version Of The Old "Voluntariness" Standard, Alfredo Garcia Jul 2015

Mental Sanity And Confessions: The Supreme Court's New Version Of The Old "Voluntariness" Standard, Alfredo Garcia

Akron Law Review

Although the voluntariness standard has not been entirely superseded by Miranda v. Arizona because it is applicable to confessions obtained through police coercion, in spite of compliance with Miranda's technical requirements, it has receded into relative obscurity in the wake of Miranda. In Colorado v. Connelly, however, the United States Supreme Court confronted a novel case which neatly juxtaposed questions relevant to the voluntariness test with issues arising from Miranda's dictates. This article will examine the issues raised in Connelly, critique the Court's application of both the voluntariness standard and Miranda to the facts of Connelly, …


The Admissibility Of Confessions Compelled By Foreign Coercion: A Compelling Question Of Values In An Era Of Increasing International Criminal Cooperation, Geoffrey S. Corn, Kevin Cieply Jul 2015

The Admissibility Of Confessions Compelled By Foreign Coercion: A Compelling Question Of Values In An Era Of Increasing International Criminal Cooperation, Geoffrey S. Corn, Kevin Cieply

Pepperdine Law Review

This Article proceeds on a simple and clear premise: a confession extracted by torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment should never be admitted into evidence in a U.S. criminal trial. Whether accomplished through extending the Due Process or Self-Incrimination based exclusionary rules to foreign official coercion, or by legislative action, such exclusion is necessary to align evidentiary practice regarding confessions procured by foreign agents with our nation's fundamental values as reflected in the Fifth Amendment and our ratification of the CAT. This outcome is not incompatible with Connelly. Rather, this Article explores the limits of the Court's language in …


Rethinking Self-Incrimination, Voluntariness, And Coercion, Through A Perspective Of Jewish Law And Legal Theory, Samuel J. Levine Mar 2012

Rethinking Self-Incrimination, Voluntariness, And Coercion, Through A Perspective Of Jewish Law And Legal Theory, Samuel J. Levine

Samuel J. Levine

No abstract provided.


Rethinking Self-Incrimination, Voluntariness, And Coercion, Through A Perspective Of Jewish Law And Legal Theory, Samuel J. Levine Jan 2011

Rethinking Self-Incrimination, Voluntariness, And Coercion, Through A Perspective Of Jewish Law And Legal Theory, Samuel J. Levine

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.


Colorado V. Connelly: What Really Happened, William T. Pizzi Jan 2009

Colorado V. Connelly: What Really Happened, William T. Pizzi

Publications

In 1986, the Supreme Court decided Colorado v. Connelly, a landmark case in due process and fifth amendment law. The case began when Francis Barry Connelly approached a police officer on the street in downtown Denver to confess to having killed a young woman several months earlier in southwest Denver. Because Connelly was suffering from acute schizophrenia and was hearing auditory hallucinations commanding him to confess, state courts suppressed his statements to the police on the grounds (1) that his statements before arrest were involuntary and inadmissible under the due process clause and (2) those statements post-arrest could not …


We Can Do This The Easy Way Or The Hard Way: The Use Of Deceit To Induce Consent Searches, Rebecca Strauss Feb 2002

We Can Do This The Easy Way Or The Hard Way: The Use Of Deceit To Induce Consent Searches, Rebecca Strauss

Michigan Law Review

In October of 1995, Aaron Salvo was studying and living at Ashland College. College officials informed local FBI agents that they suspected Salvo of possible child molestation and related conduct based on incriminating electronic mail. FBI agents approached Salvo at his dormitory, asked to speak with him in private about the suspicious mail, and suggested they speak in Salvo's dorm room. Salvo agreed to speak with the officers, but declined to do so in his room because his roommate was there, and he did not want to get anyone else involved in the embarrassing nature of the upcoming conversation. Salvo …


Hurdling The Police Coercion Requirement: State Alternatives To Colorado V. Connelly, Ronald G. Woodman Jr. Mar 1998

Hurdling The Police Coercion Requirement: State Alternatives To Colorado V. Connelly, Ronald G. Woodman Jr.

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

No abstract provided.


Waiver Of Rights In The Interrogation Room: The Court's Dilemma, William T. Pizzi Jan 1991

Waiver Of Rights In The Interrogation Room: The Court's Dilemma, William T. Pizzi

Publications

No abstract provided.


Annual Survey Of Virginia Law: Criminal Procedure, Ronald J. Bacigal Jan 1987

Annual Survey Of Virginia Law: Criminal Procedure, Ronald J. Bacigal

University of Richmond Law Review

In the landmark case of New Jersey v. T.L.O., the United States Supreme Court applied the fourth amendment to searches conducted by public school officials. This past term, in O'Conner v. Ortega, the Court held that the fourth amendment is also applicable to work-related searches conducted by public employers. As in New Jersey v. T.L.O., the Court rejected the probable cause standard in favor of a "reasonableness under all the circumstances" test to determine the constitutionality of such searches. This general "reasonableness" approach was also approved in Maryland v. Garrison, where the Court held that an "objectively understandable and reasonable" …