domestic violence, assault and battery, hit and run, or any other crime, they
will usually interrogate the person they’ve arrested. Naturally, the police are
eager to get this person to confess to the crime for which they were arrested.
The police hope that every suspect will waive their right to have their Orange County criminal defense
attorney present before they answer any questions. And, in fact, most do.
Most convictions in the Orange County courts are based on incriminating
statements made by the defendant when questioned by the police.
So why do so many people say incriminating things to the police
and give up their right to have their Orange County criminal defense lawyer present? Why do they admit
to committing burglary or assaulting someone, perhaps in a case of domestic violence?
Does the defendant think that they can talk their way out of a drug sales
arrest? Is it just human nature to try to talk our way out of trouble? Or are
the police coercing the defendants to forgo their criminal defense lawyer and make
statements against their legal interest?
and give up their right to have their Orange County criminal defense lawyer present? Why do they admit
to committing burglary or assaulting someone, perhaps in a case of domestic violence?
Does the defendant think that they can talk their way out of a drug sales
arrest? Is it just human nature to try to talk our way out of trouble? Or are
the police coercing the defendants to forgo their criminal defense lawyer and make
statements against their legal interest?
Well, certainly in some cases, the police do improperly
coerce the defendant into making incriminating statements. And where the police
use coercion to trick the defendant into making incriminating statements
without their criminal defense lawyer present, those statements cannot be used
against the defendant at their criminal trial. However, if the defendant makes
incriminating statements BEFORE the police coercion occurs, then the statements
are untainted by the coercion and can be used in a criminal trial. Moreover, in
order for the statements to be suppressed, the defendant’s criminal lawyer must
show that the coercion caused the defendant to make the statements. The
coercion must be the motivation cause of the statements at issue rather than a
mere “but for” causation.
coerce the defendant into making incriminating statements. And where the police
use coercion to trick the defendant into making incriminating statements
without their criminal defense lawyer present, those statements cannot be used
against the defendant at their criminal trial. However, if the defendant makes
incriminating statements BEFORE the police coercion occurs, then the statements
are untainted by the coercion and can be used in a criminal trial. Moreover, in
order for the statements to be suppressed, the defendant’s criminal lawyer must
show that the coercion caused the defendant to make the statements. The
coercion must be the motivation cause of the statements at issue rather than a
mere “but for” causation.
A statement confessing to domestic violence, burglary, or Grand
theft can be coerced by violence or any threat of violence.
Statements can also be coerced by any direct or implied promises by the cops,
such as a promise of leniency. The United States Supreme Court stated that the
test for voluntariness is not “but for” causation, but whether the statement “was
extracted by any threats or violence … direct or implied promises … or improper
influence.” Hutto v. Ross (1976) 429 U.S. 28.
theft can be coerced by violence or any threat of violence.
Statements can also be coerced by any direct or implied promises by the cops,
such as a promise of leniency. The United States Supreme Court stated that the
test for voluntariness is not “but for” causation, but whether the statement “was
extracted by any threats or violence … direct or implied promises … or improper
influence.” Hutto v. Ross (1976) 429 U.S. 28.
Subsequent cases have also looked at the amount of time that
has elapsed between the coercion and the incriminating statements. The more
time that elapses between the coercion and the statements that incriminate
defendant in the alleged criminal activity, the more likely that a reviewing court
will find that the coercion did not cause the statements. For example, in
People v. Thompson (1990) 50 Cal.3d 134, the officer improperly told defendant
that they would incarcerate the suspect’s girlfriend unless he talked. This was
followed by several hours of voluntary conversation between the suspect and the
police without the defendant’s criminal defense attorney present. Then, the
suspect made incriminating statements. The court held that the initial coercion
did NOT cause the later statements.
has elapsed between the coercion and the incriminating statements. The more
time that elapses between the coercion and the statements that incriminate
defendant in the alleged criminal activity, the more likely that a reviewing court
will find that the coercion did not cause the statements. For example, in
People v. Thompson (1990) 50 Cal.3d 134, the officer improperly told defendant
that they would incarcerate the suspect’s girlfriend unless he talked. This was
followed by several hours of voluntary conversation between the suspect and the
police without the defendant’s criminal defense attorney present. Then, the
suspect made incriminating statements. The court held that the initial coercion
did NOT cause the later statements.
If you are facing charges for grant theft, auto theft,
domestic violence, assault and battery, or any other crime, call The Law
Offices of EJ Stopyro today for a free and confidential consultation with an
experienced criminal defense
lawyer in Orange County. You can also visit us at www.ejesquire.com. We have offices at 32072
Camino Capistrano, 2nd floor, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 and 1901
Newport Blvd., Suite 350, Costa Mesa, CA 92675.
domestic violence, assault and battery, or any other crime, call The Law
Offices of EJ Stopyro today for a free and confidential consultation with an
experienced criminal defense
lawyer in Orange County. You can also visit us at www.ejesquire.com. We have offices at 32072
Camino Capistrano, 2nd floor, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 and 1901
Newport Blvd., Suite 350, Costa Mesa, CA 92675.
No comments:
Post a Comment