N.Y. Court: Defendant's Admissions Are Voluntary Despite IQ of 55

[Thom Little]

A defendant with an IQ of 55 may be of "subnormal intelligence," but he is still capable of comprehending his Miranda rights, an appellate court in New York has ruled in upholding a murder conviction.

In People v. Hendrie, appellate defense counsel Mitchell S. Kessler of Cohoes, Albany County, came forth with a psychologist who testified that Jonathan A. Hendrie simply lacks the capacity to fully appreciate his right to remain silent and his right to counsel.

Hendrie gave oral and written statements to police, which resulted in the seizure of physical evidence and, ultimately, the defendant's conviction on charges of murder, burglary, kidnapping, criminal use of a firearm, criminal possession of a weapon, menacing and criminal mischief.

But in a unanimous decision, the Appellate Division, 3rd Department, said where the evidence is mixed -- prosecution witnesses described the defendant as relaxed and composed during the interrogation and said there was no indication he was confused -- the trial court's analysis is "entitled to great weight."

"We are persuaded that defendant's statements were voluntary and that the physical evidence recovered as a result was properly ruled admissible at trial," Justice Carl J. Mugglin wrote for a panel that also included Presiding Justice Anthony V. Cardona, Thomas E. Mercure, Robert S. Rose and John A. Lahtinen.


http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1134468311829

[cornermouse]

1. There you go...

Mental retardation, terminal illness, poverty, and mental illness are no excuse. Now, let's go spread some more compassionate conservatism around.

[mmonk]

3. The court system

has already been laying the groundwork. Look for ADA and IDEA to be further damaged.

[Deep13]

2. Doesn't an IQ test presume that the one being tested ...

... wants to do well? When the defendant has an incentive to appear retarded, it should not surprise anyone that he scores low.

You note what the expert defense witness said on the stand, but not the sheds the prosecutor left him in on cross examination.

[mmonk]

4. So how do you know? Dismiss all tests

as someone wanting to appear retarded?

[Deep13]

5. As the appellate court said,...

...rely on the trial court to ascertain whether or not Miranda waivers were voluntary based on the totality of the circumstances.