Document: 385 U.S. 493 87 S.Ct. 616 17 L.Ed.2d 562 Edward J. GARRITY et al., Appellants,v.STATE OF NEW JERSEY. No. 13. Argued Nov. 10, 1966. Decided Jan. 16, 1967. Daniel L. O'Connor, Washington, D.C., for appellants. Alan B. Handler, Newark, N.J., appellee. Mr. Justice DOUGLAS delivered the opinion of Court. 1 Appellants were police officers in certain New Jersey boroughs. The Supreme Court ordered that alleged irregularities handling cases municipal courts those boroughs be investigated by Attorney General, invested him with broad powers inquiry and investigation, directed to make a report court. matters concerned fixing traffic tickets. 2 Before being questioned, each appellant was warned (1) anything he said might used against any state criminal proceeding; (2) had privilege refuse answer if disclosure would tend incriminate him; but (3) refused subject removal from office.1 3 answered questions. No immunity granted, as there is no statute applicable these circumstances. Over their objections, some answers given subsequent prosecutions conspiracy obstruct administration laws. convicted convictions sustained over protests statements coerced,2 reason fact that, they answer, could lose positions department. See State v. Naglee, 44 N.J. 209, 207 A.2d 689; 259, 208 146. 4 We postponed question jurisdiction hearing on merits. 383 941, 86 16 205. whose validity sought 'drawn question,' 28 U.S.C. § 1257(2), forfeiture statute.3 But reach (44 at 223, A.2d, 697), deeming voluntariness only issue presented. Id., 220—222, 695—696. therefore too tangentially involved satisfy bearing it whether, valid or not, fear discharged under refusal one hand self-incrimination other "a choice between rock whirlpool"4 which made products coercion violation Fourteenth Amendment. dismiss appeal, treat papers petition certiorari (28 2103), grant proceed 5 agree forfeiture-of-office relevant here has voluntary character convict petitioners prosecutions. 6 imposed job forfeiture. Coercion vitiates confession Chambers Florida, 309 227, 60 472, 84 L.Ed. 716, related can 'mental well physical'; 'the blood accused not hallmark an unconstitutional inquisition.' Blackburn Alabama, 361 199, 206, 80 274, 279, 242. Subtle pressures (Leyra Denno, 347 556, 74 98 948; Haynes 373 503, 83 1336, 10 513) may telling coarse vulgar ones. whether deprived his 'free admit, deny, answer.' Lisenba People California, 314 219, 241, 62 280, 292, 166. 7 adhere Boyd United States, 116 616, 524, 29 746, civil action property. A offered owner election producing document goods proceeding. This held form compulsion both Fifth Amendment Fourth 634—635, It principle we apply Spevack Klein, 511, 625, 574. 8 either forfeit jobs themselves. option means livelihood pay penalty antithesis free speak out remain silent. That practice, like interrogation practices reviewed Miranda Arizona, 384 436, 464—465, 1602, 1623, 694, 'likely exert such pressure upon individual disable making rational choice.' think infected coercion5 inherent this scheme questioning cannot our prior decisions. 9 'waiver.' That, however, federal us decide. Union Pac. R.R. Co. Public Service Comm., 248 67, 69—70, 39 24, 25, 63 131. Stevens Marks, supra, 234, 243—244, 788, 793. speaking certificate exacted protest Commerce Clause, said: 'Were otherwise, conduct duress involves choice, always possible impose burden threat penalties worse than case failure accept it, then declare acceptance * *.' U.S., 70, 25. 11 Where 'between whirlpool,' deciding 'waive' other. 12 'It interest party choose lesser two evils. according does exclude duress. characteristic properly so called.' Ibid. 13 In paid protest. also, though succumbed compulsion, preserved raising them earliest point. Cf. Abie Bank Bryan, 282 765, 776, 51 252, 256, 75 690. are quite different situation where who anxious clean breast whole affair volunteers information. 14 Holmes McAuliffe Bedford, 155 Mass. 216, N.E. 517, stated dictum heavily relies: 15 'The petitioner have constitutional right talk politics, policeman. There few employments hire servant suspend speech idleness implied terms contract. complain, takes employment him. On same city reasonable condition holding offices within its control.' 220, N.E., 517—518. case, cognizable terms. Our State, contrary requirement Amendment, use discharge secure incriminatory evidence employee. Slochower Board Education, 350 551, 76 637, 100 692, public school teacher merely because invoked when questioned congressional committee: 18 reduced hollow mockery exercise taken equivalent guilt conclusive presumption perjury. serves protect innocent otherwise ensnared ambiguous circumstances.' 557—558, 641. 19 conclude policemen, teachers lawyers, relegated watered-down version rights. 20 rights stature exaction price. Engaging interstate commerce one. Western Tel. Kansas, 216 1, 30 190, 54 355. Resort diversity citizenship another. Terral Burke Constr. Co., 257 529, 42 188, 66 352. Assertion First still Lovell City Griffin, 303 444, 58 666, 82 949; Murdock Com. Pennsylvania, 319 105, 870, 1292; Thomas Collins, 323 516, 65 315, 89 430; Lamont Postmaster 381 301, 305—306, 85 1493, 1495—1496, 398. imposition Twenty-fourth also banned. Harman Forssenius, 380 528, 1177, 50. now hold protection coerced prohibits proceedings obtained office, extends all, policemen members body politic. 21 Reversed. 22 HARLAN, whom CLARK STEWART join, dissenting. 23 majority plurality 574, stem fundamental misconceptions about logic necessities self-incrimination. I opinions will seriously needlessly hinder important values. must dissent here, do Spevack. 24 employs curious mixture doctrines invalidate convictions, confess difficulty perceiving intended relationships among various segments opinion. gather believes possibility been provide information pertinent responsibilities impermissible 'condition' petitioners' From premise draws conclusion after warning inadmissible. Evidently recognizing weakness conclusion, attempts bring support illustrations lengthy series Court, light all circumstances, adjudged persons. 25 apparently engaged delicate task riding unruly horses once: presumably arguing simultaneously involuntary matter fact, fashion 513, thought involuntary, inadmissible law, privilege. These very contentions require separate replies, my plainly mistaken, reasons follow. I. 26 turn first suggestion fact. An assessment requires more comprehensive examination circumstances undertaken. 27 material times Bellmawr Barrington, Jersey. Garrity Bellmawr's chief Virtue officers; Holroyd, Elwell, Murray Barrington. Another defendant below, Mrs. clerk court, since died. June 1961 sua sponte State's General investigate reports ticket Subsequent investigations produced petitioners, conspiracies, falsified court records, altered tickets, diverted moneys bail fines unauthorized purposes. course sworn petitioners; portions admitted trial. trials proper motor laws, consolidated purposes review. affirmed convictions. Deputy August November 1961. All usual indicia wholly absent. As noted, 'no physical coercion, overbearing tactics psychological persuasion, incommunicado detention, efforts humiliate ridicule defendants.' 689, 695. found reluctant offer statements, concluded interrogations conducted 'high degree civility restraint.' conclusions fully substantiated record. room local firehouse, Chief himself arrangements. None custody before depositions taken; continued pursue ordinary duties official community. recorded stenographer, testified witnessed indications unwillingness even significant hesitation part petitioners. did counsel present, without contradiction informed strolled Garrity's office firehouse arranged counsel, none required stage. excessively lengthy, assure comfort witnesses. known suffer heart ailment, assured cease she felt discomfort. Barrington less certain, informal agreement trial defendants argue simply dismissal 'involuntary law.' defense contend result mental wills overborne. Accordingly, never obliged statements. are, three present taken. Insofar suggests Haynes, introduced factual contention urged considered 31 commenced, sworn, carefully need give information, reminded prosecution, officer proceeding failed responsibilities. cautionary varied slightly, except included warnings.1 Naglee told removed her position duties. consented displayed hesitation, suggested decision motivated discharge. 32 second statement September December 1962. materially content first. distinction interrogator advert obliquely dismissal. cautioned entitled silent, whatever coercion. 33 trial, gave essentially consistent them. At preliminary determine beyond proof 34 standards employed assess accused's reflected number values, thus emphasized variety criteria. criteria threats imminet danger, Payne Arkansas, 356 560, 78 844, 975, deprivations, Reck Pate, 367 433, 81 1541, 948, repeated extended interrogation, 47i, limits access friends, Crooker 357 1287, 1448, length illegality detention incapacity, Lynumn Illinois, 372 adequacy warnings rights, Davis North Carolina, 737, 1761, 895. Whatever employed, duty 'to examine entire record,' thereby 'was overborne him.' 741, 739, 1764, 1763. 35 difficult imagine completely inapplicable, requirements subsequently thoroughly satisfied. Each received complete explicit reminder Three present; least fourth consulted freely determined presence unnecessary. 'swept familiar surroundings into custody, surrounded antagonistic forces, subjected techniques persuasion 461, 1621. manifest developed voluntariness, basis saying involuntarily. II. 36 remaining law,' What really score, truth 'voluntariness' rather self-incrimination, namely instance itself render Absent involuntariness admissibility hinges consequence acknowledged resulted given. If constitutionally permissible, surely objection cautions witness follow remains obliged, order prevent prove established Brown Mississippi, 297 278, 56 682, involuntarily made. central issues identical presented supra: consequences permitted claimant invocation privilege, so, permissible. For view nothing demands witness' silence forbidden privileged. depends hazards, any, presents integrity urgency interests designed protect. 37 hardly denied Constitution establish qualifications employees. Nor arbitrary unreasonable insist employees furnish appropriate authorities employment. Beilan 399, 1317, 1414; Higher 692. Finally, plain particular assist prevention detection unlawful activities government. obvious officials directly entrusted justice. importance systems justice forces scarcely exaggerated. Thus, recalled often intervened precisely ground encourage high behavior. See, e.g., Ashcraft Tennessee, 322 143, 64 921, 88 1192; supra. concluded, therefore, sanction reasonably calculated serve most basic citizens 38 final hazard, which, officer's law vary. predicated imputation drawn occurred vantage point, improper assume employ procedures good faith employee's fitness procedure investigating loyalty employee, until today consistently paused actual case. supra; Nelson Los Angeles County, 362 527, 494. am unable see justification majority's abandonment process; essential guarantee generous opportunities pursuit prohibition, hand, scope purposes, hampers Despite disclaimer, prohibiting rule policemen. entirely forbid presents, face, hazard expected interests. discharges vindicate inferences penalize privileged silence, instead presume enforce employees.2 such, minimize endanger self-incrimination.3 provided this, follows unobjectionable. Given constitutionality application, prosecution were, given, above, 40 affirm judgments 'Any person elective appointive (whether county municipal), refuses testify relating wherein called behalf compel waive grand jury thereon willfully fails appear commission inquire oath who, having himself, shall, employment, therefrom shall vested future tenure pension granted relates arose preceding five years. Any forfeiting thereafter eligible appointment State.' N.J.Rev.Stat. 2A:81—17.1 (Supp.1965), N.J.S.A. excused inter alia, voluntary. witnesses manner appellants hearing. N. 243, 793, 724, quoting Frost Trucking Railroad Comm'n, 271 583, 593, 46 605, 607, 70 1101. Lamm, 5th Its Equivalent Jewish Law, Decalogue Jour. (Jan.—Feb.1967): should pointed out, outset, Halakhah distinguish forced confessions, discussed later. And differences Constitutional Talmudic Law arises. According Constitution, man compelled himself. provision citizen avail wishes. Halakhah, permit self-incriminating testimony. inadmissible, voluntarily offered. Confession, religious context, financial traces criminality, instrument Law. issue, then, idea legal confession. obviously protecting confessant own aberrations themselves, fabricated exaggerations real facts. While certainly confessions attributable, part, Death Instinct, sufficiently minority instances, disqualify discard instrument. function ensure total victory Life Instinct omnipresent antagonist. Such Maimonides' interpretation Halakhah's 'In summary, ruling concerns restricted historical evolution civilized torture extorting confessions. Halakhic ruling, much broader discards toto, insight concern saving destructive inclinations.' 12. typical. 'I want advise you say your accord promises be, course, state. 'You have, probably know, you. knowledge voluntarily, relation questions put investigation. 'This somewhat limited extent laws state, pertaining office. doesn't mean, can't right. You right.' A. 'No, cooperate.' Q. 'Understanding willing time questions?' 'Yes.' legislative history N.J.Rev.Stat.2A:81—17.1, provides clearly indicates statute, what inferred face. event, noted below entitled, statutory authorization, declined look forecast late Judge Jerome Frank once spirited permissible decline, grounds disclose quoted following approval: "Duty answer. Privilege They chose inconsistent officers. claim face clear them.' Christal Police Commission San Francisco'. Citing Cal.App.2d 564, 92 P.2d 416. (Emphasis added Frank.) States Field, Cir., 193 F.2d 92, 106 (separate opinion).

Category: 0