(California) State Court Blasts Violations of Miranda Rights | LA Times

[Ediacara]

State Court Blasts Violations of Miranda Rights

SAN FRANCISCO — In a ruling laced with words such as "misconduct" and "unconscionable," the California Supreme Court made it clear Monday that it no longer will tolerate the practice by some California police agencies of deliberately ignoring suspects' right to remain silent.

In doing so, the justices overturned the conviction of a man who was convicted of killing a 69-year-old who had given him a home.

The defendant confessed, but only after being "badgered" by a detective even after he had asked for a lawyer nine times, the court said. Police not only denied the 18-year-old suspect, Kenneth Ray Neal, access to a lawyer, they locked him up overnight without food, water or a toilet until he asked to speak to a detective and confessed, the justices wrote.

More at the Los Angeles Times

[chrisesq]

1. This is ridiculous.

This is such an established area of law that it is beyond my comprehension that police departments continue to violate this right.

For god's sake, this right was just reaffirmed by the SCOTUS just a few short years ago.

Of course here were a few that voted to not reaffirm the right. Any guesses on who that was?

[nolabels]

3. Don't really know, but I would say Renquist, Scalia & Uncle Tom

only a guess, but did I get it correct, any prizes :hi:

[chrisesq]

4. Ding, DIng, Ding--Actually it was just Scalia and Thomas, close enough

The prize of course is Herr Ashcroft will come to your house and sing "Let The Eagles Soar" for you and your loved ones.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

5. But didn't they just rule that it's ok to coerce as long as you don't

use it in court? A California case that I am ashamed to say Bill Lockyer argued FOR coersion. Not really involved in crim but thought they ruled in favor of the state on that one this year~

[chrisesq]

6. I wouldn't go so far as to say that coersion is permissible

However, it is correct in that statements made in custody without the Miranda warning first being given are not able to be used in court.

There are some exceptions to that general rule, but I doubt you want a criminal procedure lecture.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

7. Sorry, it was a tort claim for coersive interrogation

http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/search/display.html?terms=chavez%20v.%20martinez&url=/supct/html/01-1444.ZO.html

[newyawker99]

8. Hi chrisesq!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

2. Rose Byrd is smiling from heaven after having died a lonely dejected

death. Funny thing is, all but one of Cally's SCJ's are Repub appointees who benefitted from Byrd's departure (via the vicious RW attacks on her by the likes of Deukmejian) and now honor her sense of justice with this ruling!! :D

Rose Byrd gets that LAST LAUGH!!!!

As for the perp, the police have no one to blame but themselves if he walks again.