Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1109086
 
 

Footnotes (219)



 


 



Police Deception before Miranda Warnings: The Case for Per Se Exclusion of an Entirely Unjustified Practice at a Particularly Sensitive Moment


Robert P. Mosteller


University of North Carolina (UNC) at Chapel Hill - School of Law

2007

Texas Tech Law Review, Vol. 39, No. 4, p. 1239, 2007
Duke Law School Legal Studies Paper No. 196

Abstract:     
This essay focuses on the limits of deception practiced before the suspect waives his or her rights under Miranda v. Arizona (1966). In Miranda, the Court stated: [A]ny evidence that the accused was threatened, tricked, or cajoled into a waiver will, of course, show that the suspect did not voluntarily waive his privilege. The quotation appears to forbid any evidence of threats, tricks, or cajolery, which contributes to a waiver of the privilege, creating a per se exclusion. However, in Moran v. Burbine (1986), the Court shifts focus away from the nature of the police conduct to its effect on waiver, far from a per se rule.

This essay demonstrates that substantial pre-warning softening up and some pre-waiver deception is permitted as a regular matter by the lower courts. While ploys and implicit deception, such as softening up the suspect by establishing rapport before the warning do undercut the effectiveness of Miranda by making the reading of rights just part of doing the paperwork, they are not subject to effective challenge. Because these ploys work in most cases, police do not need generally to use overt deception prior to the warnings.

In extremely serious cases, such as homicides, police interest in lowering the risk that assertion will occur provides some incentive to push the envelope, moving them to more aggressive ploys, such as the talk about the evidence-then warn strategy. Invoking the Miranda right is difficult without a warning being given. This essay argues that while a per se rule that any evidence that waiver was tricked or cajoled is too broad, non-trivial overt lies told after the suspect is placed in custody but prior to Miranda warnings should categorically be prohibited.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 36

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: March 23, 2008 ; Last revised: October 3, 2012

Suggested Citation

Mosteller, Robert P., Police Deception before Miranda Warnings: The Case for Per Se Exclusion of an Entirely Unjustified Practice at a Particularly Sensitive Moment (2007). Texas Tech Law Review, Vol. 39, No. 4, p. 1239, 2007; Duke Law School Legal Studies Paper No. 196. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1109086

Contact Information

Robert P. Mosteller (Contact Author)
University of North Carolina (UNC) at Chapel Hill - School of Law ( email )
Van Hecke-Wettach Hall, 160 Ridge Road
CB #3380
Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3380
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,770
Downloads: 112
Download Rank: 147,187
Footnotes:  219

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo6 in 0.406 seconds