Rhode Island V. Innis, Supreme Court of the United States, 1980.446 U.S
291,100 S.Ct.1682, 64, L.Ed.2d 297.
Facts
The
respondent had been arrested by the police in relation to a murder. The police
decided to transport him to the station where he would be interrogated (p.658).
They noted to inform him of his Miranda right prior to that transportation. In
response to a conversation between two policemen and which did not involve the
respondent, the respondent offered to show them where a gun allegedly used in
the murder was. The respondent’s motion to suppress this information at trial
was denied and he was convicted of the charge.
Procedural history
This is
an Appeal from the Rhode Island Supreme Court which affirmed the decision of
the trial court in that state to admit evidence given by the respondent as the police were transporting him to the
station for interrogation(p.658).
Issue /Question
Whether
the respondent was ‘interrogated’ by the police in violation of his undisputed
right under Miranda to remain silent until he had consulted with a lawyer (p.658)?
Holding
No (p.660).
Reasoning
The
court contended that interrogation as envisaged in Miranda occurs either when a
suspect is expressly questioned by the police or when circumstances are such
that a conversation may be seen as a functional equivalent of express questioning
(p.659). It becomes a functional equivalent when the police would have
reasonably expected their conversation to elicit a self incriminatory response
from the respondent. The court then noted that the conversation between the two
officers was such short and on and off to have met this reasonableness
requirement.
My Opinion
I do
not agree with the holding in this case. The majority seems to have failed in
recognizing the ability of the police to use psychological tactics to illegally
obtain evidence from suspects.
0 comments:
Post a Comment