|
|
|
| Interrogations/Sixth Amendment |
|
Fellers v. United States,
No. 02-6320 (U.S., January 26, 2004): Sixth Amendment right to counsel violated when police questioned accused at his home after Indictment.
|
|
|
United States v. Dowell,
No. 03-1341 (10th Cir., December 6, 2005) (Published): Convictions for destroying government property by fire and interfering with IRS officials affirmed over several claims, but noteworthy decision because it re-affirms that a criminal defendant may challenge a confession by another witness, even a witness for the Government(!) Rob Nigh told this to me years ago and I thought it was a very useful piece of knowledge. The standard is fairly high, the same as challenging a defendant's own confession as being coerced, but there is no standing issue because the defendant is actually asserting a constitutional Due Process claim that his trial would be fundamentally unfair if the coerced confession is used (because such a confession is not reliable). The Circuit recognized the right of Dowell to make such a claim but denied the claim under the facts of his case (his evidence of coercion was weak). It works like a Jackson v. Denno hearing (to challenge the defendant's own statements): you must request an evidentiary hearing on the issue in order to preserve the record (and you must make a credible showing of coercion). Still, if you have a case involving co-defendants or any witness that made statements to the police and the government wants to introduce such statements against your client, be sure to realize that YOU can challenge the statements if there is a basis to believe that the statements were not the product of the person's free will.
|
|
|
|
