Document: 392 U.S. 219 88 S.Ct. 2008 20 L.Ed.2d 1047 Eddie M. HARRISON, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES. No. 876. Argued April 4, 1968. Decided June 10, Alfred V. J. Prather, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Francis X. Beytagh, Jr., Cleveland, Ohio, respondent. Mr. Justice STEWART delivered the opinion of Court. 1 The petitioner was brought to trial before a jury in District Columbia upon charge felony murder.1 At that prosecution introduced three confessions allegedly made by while he custody police. After these had been admitted evidence, took witness stand and testified his own version events leading victim's death. found guilty, but Court Appeals reversed conviction, holding petitioner's illegally obtained were therefore inadmissible evidence against him. Harrison v. United States, 123 U.S.App.D.C. 230, 238, 359 F.2d 214, 222; on rehearing en banc, 239, 223.2 2 substance two others, armed with shotgun, gone house intending rob him, victim killed resisting their entry into home. In testimony at said companions home hoping pawn accidently presenting gun him inspection. 3 Upon remand, case again came jury. This time prosecutor did not, course, offer alleged evidence. But read prior trial—testimony which placed petitioner, shotgun hand, scene killing. over objection defense counsel, who argued induced testify former only because introduction confessions. convicted, affirmed.3 We granted certiorari decide whether fruit procured confessions.4 4 this we need not do question general evidentiary rule defendant's is admissible later proceedings.5 A defendant chooses waives privilege compulsory self-incrimination respect gives, waiver no less effective or complete may have motivated take first place reason strength lawful adduced 5 Here, however, after Government confessions, all wrongfully obtained,6 same principle prohibits use so also any impelled thereby—the poisonous tree, invoke time-worn metaphor. For 'essence provision forbidding acquisition certain way merely acquired shall be used it all.' Silverthorne Lumber Co. 251 385, 392, 40 182, 183, 64 L.Ed. 319.7 6 concluding could without regard testified, relied fact 'made conscious tactical decision seek acquittal taking (his) in-custody statements let * *.'8 observation beside point. knowing testify, why. If order overcome impact hence improperly introduced, then tainted illegality rendered themselves inadmissible.9 As Tobriner wrote Supreme California, 7 'If improper (a) extrajudicial confession testimonial admission guilt, shield resulting conviction from reversal, separate what told confessed police during interrogation.'10 8 remaining prosecution's wrongful It is, difficult unravel many considerations might led trial. But, having jury, can hardly demand demonstration would as if used. 'The springs conduct are subtle varied,' Cardozo once observed. 'One meddles them must insist too nice measure proof spring released exclusion others.'11 Having 'released spring' using unlawfully show its illegal action induce testimony.12 9 No such showing has here. opening statement counsel announced behalf. Only stand. thus appears that, all.13 even decided used, does follow being crime when fatal shot fired. On contrary, more natural inference damaging already spread jury.14 That an dispelled. 10 demonstrated, therefore, 'by means sufficiently distinguishable' underlying 'to purged primary taint.' Wong Sun 371 471, 488, 83 407, 417, 441. Accordingly, judgment reversed. 11 Reversed. 12 BLACK, dissenting. 13 seems me carries Court-made doctrine excluding 'fruit tree' wholly illogical completely unreasonable extent. reasons suggested my Brother WHITE'S dissent, I agree holdings like make far protect society 'against those impossible live today safety.' affirm conviction. 14 HARLAN, 15 Like BLACK WHITE, am unable understand why reverses There suggestion question, given advice somehow unreliable. Nor, WHITE amply demonstrates, there plausible argument adds ounce deterrence violation Mallory rule. 16 doubt 'voluntariness' always purely subjective state mind; involve objective analysis fairness situation government agents Nor out possibility direct product unlawful official activity properly excludable activity—even where unforeseeable deterrent rationale will suffice—on ground should play ignoble part. 17 concepts reach case. apparently good faith, offered one out-of-court objected overruled, how proceed. While believed grounds reversal appeal (as held did) present effort persuade acquit. course structured meet Government's stood—including limited confession—and put client stand.* 18 criminal civil defendants face time: believing error committed result appeal, they nevertheless defense, doing help other side retrial. here different sacrifice surprise, conveyance important leads side, occur continues committed. price paid system justice insists, generally full trials appellate review points law. problem avoided, within our system, done here, namely, reaching wrong between litigants. acceptable doctrine. 19 others comprehensible purported procedures trying criminals reliable finding facts minimizing mistakes. Cases States Wade, 388 218, 87 1926, 1149 (1967); Gilbert State 263, 1951, 1178 Bruton 391 123, 1620, 476 (1968), example, least claim redeeming virtue. Miranda Arizona, 384 436, 86 1602, 694 (1966), emanated Court's fuzzy ideology about relate Constitution excludes highest relevance probity. 21 Three times convicted murdering robbery shotgun. 1960. second trial, 1963, written oral codefendants introduced. Petitioner gave He crime. Conviction followed. reversed, admitted, involuntary coerced, violated 354 449, 77 1356, 1479 (1957), recent decisions Killough 119 336 929 (1964), Harling 111 174, 295 161 (1961). By third 1966, witnesses dead unavailable. Considerable reliance including admissions defense. time. now reverses, contrary Appeals. court exclude voluntary statements, under oath open counsel. 22 untruthful hold compelled incriminate himself Fifth Amendment. obvious. 'compelled' takes counter strong much admit not. To avoid absurd construction Self-Incrimination Clause, casts label. Harrison's says 'impelled' Alternatively suggests except taken either basis, deemed permitted benefit whatever. disagree. 23 'fruits' cannot convict complex elusive. unsettled questions it. Court, overlook problems adopting overly simple mechanical notion subscribe. view some matter causally linked Government—linked broad 'but for' sense causality rarely relevant matters come time—it 'fruit' such. strictly causal fruits consistent dictum 319 (1920), '(i)f knowledge (the facts) gained independent source proved *.' Silverthorne, copies photographs original documents seized; imagine hung closer trunk poison tree. critical limitation Nardone 308 338, 341, 60 266, 268, 84 307 (1939), Frankfurter stated that: 24 'Sophisticated prove connection information through illicit wire-tapping proof. sense, become attenuated dissipate 25 Cf. 487—488, 441 (1963); 239—242, 1938—1940, (1967). concept implicit quoted statement, it, mere insufficient something fruit. Rather shown suppression serve purpose itself. When deals search seizure, confession, decides case,1 itself prophylactic—to deter engaging future denying past benefits. See Linkletter Walker, 381 618, 634 639, 85 1731, 1740—1743, 601 (1965). Since justification unless prophylactic end. deem crucial issue, proper resolution requires bulled way. 26 makes plain, 'difficult Ante, 224. Given difficulty determining stand, seem patent stage basis predicting likely waive obtain than realistically supposed spurred greater rational supposition success endeavor incriminatory case, see doubting testimony, remove further temptation violate Constitution.2 27 Even true adopted served minimal function, able join Marginal these, especially dealing technical requirements cases 1356 (1957); Massiah 377 201, 1199, 246 (1964); Escobedo Illinois, 378 478, 1758, 977 1602 override interest probative. most issue arise, virtually vanish altogether. Police know interrogation warnings void Federal apprised unduly long detention arraignment invalidate period. coupled realization subsequent act diminish guided inducements refrain clear conceivably thought decrease fail give detain prisoner long, unusable timely soon acquires lawyer. circumstances reasonably believe ever actually short, gives specific deprives last vestige deterrence. Of methods initial doubt, little effect value fruits. find minimal. event provides adopts today. 28 deeply concerned implications unexplained unfounded decision. follows, indicates quoting People Spencer, 66 Cal.2d 158, 164, 57 Cal.Rptr. 163, 168, 424 P.2d 715, 719 (1967), automatically excluded admitted. Similarly, preceding plea guilty taint plea. And, final consequence, today's bar defective impeachment deliberately lies. All results flow necessarily adoption test relies existence link seized precluding uses end alone justifies admittedly high probative overriding goal law—the just guilty—I dissent. 29 compounds substantive procedural ploy switching burden prosecution. rules 'the testimony.' despite person actual varied 'springs conduct' caused himself. five years ago clearly affirmed traditional bears complained illegality. Fahy Connecticut, 375 85, 91, 229, 232, 171 (1963). 267, (1939). switch justified misguided desire constitutional distaste. Because reject seeks serve, endorse naked manipulation achieve 30 current perhaps logic common policy squarely opposed. human values obstacles places path policeman, prosecutor, judge alike. Criminal simply protecting safety. An earlier vacated appeal. n. infra. Two 1479. banc Appeals, 161. 6, 128 245, 387 203. 389 969, 495, 460. contention denied right speedy merit rejected U.S.App.D.C., 248—250, F.2d, 206—208. indicted eight tried offense involved. His became man represented post-verdict proceedings ex-convict posing attorney, 232—233, 216—217; employed retrial, 222, 223; presently us. Virtually delays complains occurred resulted actions assure careful unusually See, e.g., Edmonds 106 373, 377—378, 273 108, 112—113; Ayres Cir., 193 739, 740—741. And C. McCormick, Evidence §§ 131, 230—235, 239 (1954). posture obtained, 223, dispute. proceed assumption correct ruling inadmissible, intimate evaluate 307; 484—488, 415—417, 171. opinions Chief Traynor Jackson, 67 96, 97, 248, 251, 429 600, 603, Polk, 63 443, 47 1, 406 641, 644, 164—169, 167—172, 719—724, Bilderbach, 62 757, 763—768, 44 313, 316—319, 401 921, 924—927. 252, 203, 210. occasion canvass arise accused challenged poisoned tree.' R. Ruffin, Out Limb Poisonous Tree: Tainted Witness, U.C.L.A. Law Rev. 32, Comment, Fruit Tree—A Plea Relevant Criteria, 115 U.Pa.L.Rev. 1136, 1143—1153 Compare 241, 1939, 1149; 272 273, 1956—1957, 1178. dissenting today, post, 234, case-in-chief. supra, Cal.2d, Cal.Rptr., P.2d, 719—720. dissent suppressed 'even confession,' since warrant placing new 'obstacles alike.' Post, 235. empirical available. '(s)ince practical never easy negative, conclusive factual data assembled.' Elkins 364 206, 80 1437, 1669. warrants obtained—it imperative judicial integrity.' Id., 1444. wake nothing creates impediment legitimate investigating prosecuting restores prevailed obeyed De Cicco Schweizer, 221 N.Y. 431, 438, 117 N.E. 807, 810, L.R.A.1918E 1004. 722, 170. Harlan recently observed, 'when uttered voluntary, proving directly produced confession.' Darwin 346, 351, 1488, 1490, 630 (concurring part part). compels conclusion Chapman 386 18, 24, 824, 828, 705: 'Certainly admitting highly prejudicial someone prejudiced harmless.' 'In evaluating erroneous assess (the) reaction available 165, 720. Bayer, 331 532, 1394, 91 1654: 'Of cat bag confessing, inducement, thereafter free psychological disadvantages confessed. get back bag. secret good. looked first.' 540, 1398 (dictum). 349, 1489, 1490 (separate MR. JUSTICE HARLAN); Beecher Alabama, 35, 36, 2, 189, 190, 35; Clewis Texas, 707, 710, 1338, 1340, 423. altogether 350, 630, position impression considered involuntary. Here (1) involuntary; (2) in-court indication whatever misunderstood in; (3) possibly cumulative rebut (b) damaged manner quite confession. essential predicate seemingly condition precedent avoids. assumes, deciding, both correctly decided. reverse questions. depriving gain incentive exists toward practice. focus forward—to prevent violations, punish ones. Consequently, chain linkage 'sophisticated argument,' inappropriate. unlikely officers foresaw probable illegality; motivating force behind follows threat operate situation. Absent this, prejudice society's criminal.' 1148—1149 appreciation significance element well element, substantial Smith 324 879 (1963), cert. denied, 954, 1632, 498 Harlow 301 361 (C.A.5th Cir.), 814, 25, 56 (1962).

Category: 0