Document: 445 U.S. 552 100 S.Ct. 1358 63 L.Ed.2d 622 Winfield L. ROBERTS, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES. No. 78-1793. Argued Jan. 14, 15, 1980. Decided April Syllabus Held : The District Court properly considered, as one factor in imposing consecutive sentences on petitioner who had pleaded guilty to two counts of using a telephone facilitate the distribution heroin, petitioner's refusal cooperate with Government officials investigating related criminal conspiracy distribute heroin which he was confessed participant. Pp. 556-562. (a) No misinformation constitutional magnitude present this case; rebuffed repeated requests for his cooperation over period three years and concedes that authorities is "laudable endeavor" bears "rational connection defendant's willingness shape up change behavior." By declining cooperate, rejected an obligation community life should be recognized before rehabilitation can begin protected former partners crime, thereby preserving ability resume activities upon release. 556-558. (b) Nor failure justified basis fears physical retaliation self-incrimination, or ground punished him exercising Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. These arguments were raised first time appellate brief, neither nor lawyer having offered any explanation sentencing court even though it known intransigency would used him. Although requirement Miranda v. Arizona, 384 436, 86 1602, 16 694, specific warnings creates limited exception rule self-incrimination not self-executing must claimed, does apply outside context inherently coercive custodial interrogation designed, here there no interrogation. Petitioner volunteered confession at interview investigators, after been given when free leave. For next until received sentence now challenges, counsel—who both fully apprised extent could expected affect sentence—ever claimed unwillingness based right remain silent fear 559-562. 195 U.S.App.D.C. 1, 600 F.2d 815, affirmed. Stephen M. Shapiro, Washington, D. C., respondent. Allan Palmer, petitioner. Mr. Justice POWELL delivered opinion Court. 1 question whether sentence, 2 * Roberts accompanied Cecilia Payne office United States Attorney Columbia day June 1975. surveillance previously revealed green Jaguar owned by transport within District. told investigators she occasionally lent petitioner, waiting hall. At Payne's suggestion, asked if answer some questions. voluntarily, gave required 694 (1966). They also When indicated stay, knew "Boo" Thornton, then principal target investigation. admitted Thornton several occasions. Confessing discussed drug transactions certain intercepted conversations, explained meaning code words conversations. name suppliers, however, evasive answers. warned bear charges brought him, provided further information. 3 indicted count conspiring 21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 846, four § 843(b).1 He retained lawyer, Government's continued efforts enlist assistance. In March 1976, entered plea 4 15 years' imprisonment, special parole, $5,000 fine. Appeals vacated conviction terms agreement inadequately disclosed Roberts, 187 90, 570 999 (1977). On remand, misuse under permitted seek substantial sentence. filed memorandum recommending 48 months each fine.2 cited previous 10 bank robbery, voluntary confession, subsequent suppliers. emphasized tragic social consequences trade. Since himself addict familial responsibilities, theorized sold support extravagant lifestyle while unemployed parole. concluded stern necessary deter those traffic deadly drugs personal profit. 5 hearing, defense counsel noted incarcerated pending appeal codefendant sentenced probation. Counsel argued receive concurrent result immediate directed court's attention explaining refused identify other members because "wasn't involved it." App. 30. prosecutor responded request probation "ironic" light investigation course "many, many years, knowing what faces." Id., 36. Thus, ask "to take into account extenuating mitigating circumstances, defendant has cooperated. . " Ibid. Stressing seriousness offense absence excuse mitigation, recommended prison term. 6 imposed parole term but declined impose these appropriate from robbery offenses, dealer Government.3 again appealed, contending have considered cooperate. Circuit otherwise affirmed judgment. 815 (1979). We granted certiorari, 444 822, 42, 62 29 (1979), we affirm. II 7 principles governing district courts require extensive elaboration. Congress 8 "[n]o limitation shall placed information concerning background, character, conduct person convicted may consider purpose sentence." 18 3577. 9 This reviewed detail history philosophy modern conception "the punishment fit offender merely crime." Williams New York, 337 241, 247, 69 1079, 1083, 93 L.Ed. 1337 (1949); see Grayson, 438 41, 45-50, 98 2610, 2613-2616, 57 582 (1978). Two Terms ago, reaffirmed "fundamental principle" 'a judge appropriately inquiry broad scope, largely unlimited either kind consider, source come.' 50, S.Ct., 2615-2616, quoting Tucker, 404 443, 446, 92 589, 591, 30 592 (1972). See Pennsylvania Ashe, 302 51, 55, 58 59, 60, 82 43 (1937). have, sustained due process objections "misinformation magnitude." supra, 447, 591; Townsend Burke, 334 736, 740-741, 68 1252, 1255, 1690 (1948). such case. relied essentially undisputed facts. There years. contend unable provide requested Indeed, behavior. Brief 17.4 Unless different provided, assist ongoing crimes gives rise inference laudable attitudes are lacking. 11 It hardly otherwise. Concealment crime condemned throughout our history. citizen's duty "raise 'hue cry' report felonies authorities," Branzburg Hayes, 408 665, 696, 2646, 2664, 33 626 (1972), established tenet Anglo-Saxon law least early 13th century. W. Holdsworth, History English Law 101-102 (3d ed. 1927); id., 521-522; Statute Westminster First, Edw. ch. 9, p. (1275); Second, 13 chs. 4, 6, pp. 112-115 (1285). enacted statute penalties anyone who, "having knowledge actual commission [certain felonies,] conceal, soon disclose make same [the appropriate] authority ." Act Apr. 30, 1790, Stat. 113.5 "misprision felony" archaic ring, gross indifference behavior remains badge irresponsible citizenship. 12 deeply rooted diminished witness illicit himself. silence Part III, infra, less than citizen obliged authorities. example, expose purveyors own exchange favorable disposition "obligatio[n] life" begin. Hart, Aims Criminal Law, 23 & Contemp.Prob. 401, 437 (1958). Moreover, Few facts available more relevant 'the likelihood [a defendant] will transgress more, hope respond rehabilitative lawful future career, [and] degree deem war society.' U.S., 2616, Hendrix, 505 1233, 1236 (CA2 1974). III seriously disregard irrelevant determination rather contends legitimate view concerns, asserts act informer bearing prospects rehabilitation. believes 14 merited serious consideration they presented judge. But mere possibility unarticulated explanations excuses antisocial decision. opportunity theories advances, brief. court. Even observed viewed evidence continuing intent, remained silent. insists adverse inferences drawn exercise right. find argument singularly unpersuasive. compelled self-executing. where reason believe disclosures likely incriminating, unless invoked timely fashion. Garner States, 424 648, 653-655, 96 1178, 1182, 47 370 (1976); Kordel, 397 7-10, 90 763, 766-768, 25 (1970); Mandujano, 425 564, 574-575, 1768, 1775, 212 (1976) (opinion BURGER, C. J.); 591-594, 1783-1785 (BRENNAN, J., concurring judgment).6 case, Vajtauer Commissioner Immigration, 273 103, 113, 302, 306, 71 560 (1927), "did assert manner suggest withheld testimony His assertion evidently afterthought." added "must deemed waived fairly tribunal pass believed privileged, said so determined claim legitimate.7 17 avoid force elementary arguing supplied additional protection described derives adds nothing it. Miranda's interrogations designed. protect persons exposed without assistance counsel, might informed choice 475-476, 1628; 657, 1183.8 1975, coerced.9 Thereafter, represented apprised—as petitioner—that did challenges 1978. During entire period, ever vital enforcement 19 identified impaired 'free admit, deny, refuse answer.' 1183, Lisenba California, 314 219, 280, 292, 166 (1941). resemblance "insolubly ambiguous" postarrest induced assurances contained warnings. Cf. Doyle Ohio, 426 610, 617-618, 2240, 2244-45, 49 91 (1976). conclude committed error. If invalidate record us, sanction unwarranted interference function traditionally vested trial courts. Dorszynski 418 424, 440-441, 94 3042, 3051, 41 855 (1974).10 Accordingly, judgment 20 Affirmed. BRENNAN, concurring. 22 I join Court's opinion. divisive issue case understood imply solicitude enterprise, retaliation. agree cannot faulted drawing negative noncooperation failed other, neutral, available. And questioning incriminating stand never silence. 589-594, 1782, judgment); 655-661, 1182-1186, (1927).* 24 Nevertheless, problem ambiguous troubling. As matter process, mistaken unfounded assumptions. (1948); 2618, (1978) (STEWART, dissenting) (collateral enhanced judge's unreviewable impression perjured trial). comparable importance assure penalized groundless inferences. least, judges circumstances indicates prompted constitutionally protected, morally defensible, motives. Furthermore, especially plea, advisable raise motive themselves prosecutorial recommendation severity offender's noncooperation. Rule 32 allocution sentencing, Fed.Rule Crim.Proc. 32(a)(1), reasonable silence; justification proffered, proceed determine its veracity reasonableness. Such procedure reduce danger erroneous challenge. McCarthy 394 459, 466-467, 89 1166, 1170-1171, (1969) (Fed.Rule procedure). MARSHALL, dissenting. 26 today permits imprisonment increased others activities—a unlawful motivated desire reprisal. do inform aggravate accordingly, dissent. 27 majority dispute identity activity often stem excellent illustration possibility. whom getting drugs, location, lay out co-conspirators them." Disclosure well prosecution charges.1 immunity prosecution. Petitioner's incriminate not, course, extinguished plea. 28 doubt barred increasing length jail threat longer plainly compulsion Amendment. McGautha 402 183, 1454, 711 (1971). aggravation amount impermissible penalty solely privilege. abuse discretion use become increase retaliation.2 participants rehabilitation, ante, 558, relation purposes sentencing. SeeUnited (1978); then, lawful3 acknowledges claims "would judge." Ante, 559. Because expressly state grounds judge, indulges assumption "preserv[e] release." 558. am loss discern evidentiary assumption.4 reject harsh rigid approach waiver, clear reasons judge.5 31 bare cannot, inquiry, justify conclusive about respect defendant's] restoration useful place society." 2618. A reprisal one's self family equally plausible conduct. "do time" becoming police explain necessarily indicating intended "resume [his] poor candidate information.6 enhancement burdened rights unrelated permissible goals addition, improper involvement judicial corrected through supervisory power federal courts.7 usual method obtaining self-incriminatory grant 6001 et seq. (1976 Supp. II). Prosecutors little incentive offer defendants their achieve giving option prosecute. suggestion extended knows enhance put unfair choice. give assurance prosecuted information, face overcome immunity, 34 second plea-bargaining process. upheld theory relative equality bargaining between prevents being fundamentally unfair. Santobello 257, 261, 495, 498, 427 counted fails balance tipped favor Not only able cooperation, incurring displeasure To insure intimidated accepting bargains, forbidden participating 11(e)(1); ABA Project Standards Justice, Pleas Guilty 3.3(a) (App.Draft 1968). Judge Bazelon below: "The whose impartiality cornerstone justice system, tempted, guise sentencing[,] forces securing cooperation." 3, 817 allow 35 disturbing majority's brush aside propriety strength behavior," According Court, rejection "deeply obligation," ibid. All citizens apparently "obliged authorities" way, "a citizenship," constituted "antisocial conduct" well. 36 supports conclusions civic reference concepts "hue cry" felony." Those developed era entrusted general citizenry organized force.8 unnecessary discuss historical concepts, present-day society, order analysis. American society always approved wrongdoing vow better, just admired come aid victims admiration unambiguous suggests. countervailing values loyalty privacy us large business detection. mores accurate, hard understand how "stool pigeon," "snitch," "squealer," "tattletale" common description engage 37 engaged plays role struggle check narcotics recognition role, encourage offering leniency "cooperation."9 Cooperation sort sign repentance beginning rehabilitation.10 allowed decide enterprise enforcing laws; so, creating applying crime. 38 fact notion informers contrary my understanding fundamental nature law. Some legal systems premised accused all questions societies law-abiding encouraged penalizing fail spy neighbors infractions. Our country, thankfully, chosen path. highly value directives laws, hands public officers, officers impress enterprise. today's decision, ignores precept, setting threatens encourages arbitrary irrational conversations telephone. maximum $30,000 843(c). Before explained: "Mr. your very carefully. you conviction, prior clearly dealer, Government." 40. See, e. g., 1.8(a)(v) (App. Draft 1968); 48-49; Lumbard, Sentencing Enforcement, 40 F.R.D. 406, 413-414 (1966); cf. R. Cross, System 170 (2d 1975). principled distinction "enhancing" denying "leniency" decision simply currently note, MacKinnon, author reversing "complete familiarity case" current "very light" one. 823 (1979) (separate statement denial rehearing en banc). eight certainly severe "substantial distributor," ibid., plied trade robbery. statute, amended, still effect. 4. construed "both affirmative concealment participation." n. 36, 656-657, 1183-1184, subject individual claiming impairs 561, infra. 658, 11, 1184, 11; Hoffman 341 479, 486, 814, 818, 95 1118 (1951); Mason 244 362, 364-366, 621, 622, 61 1198 (1917); Vermeulen, 436 72, 76-77 1970), cert. denied, 911, 1390, 653 legitimacy witness' reliance Rogers 340 367, 374-375, 438, 442-443, 344 (1951). employ prefer give. 431 181, 187, 5, 97 1814, 1819, 52 238 (1977), "[a]ll safeguards, designed atmosphere, rest overbearing thought caused isolation suspect custody." found freely conspiracy. Tr. (Oct. 17, 1975); 16, dissenting reflects "improper function." Post, 567. contention. participate process; undertook retrospective review record, accordance applicable 3577; 32(c). position complain "put choice." 568. actually seeks questioning, invoke stringent "knowing completely waiver" standard. 593, 1784 judgment). reasonably aware tendency questions, responsibility notice formally availing 1782-1785; 655, 1182. point, cease continue immunity. stated hearing initial made relatively minor figure lengthy sentences, "we shown wrong" assumption. seems plain requested, incriminated charges. determining taken reprisal, subjective fear, objectively reasonable. afraid relevance refers ancient misprision felony, 557-558 discussion shows, 5. contended lawful. vitality laws making observe fallen virtually complete disuse, development perception forced Note, Hastings L.J. 175, 181-187 (1975); Emory 1095 (1974). Glazebrook, Misprision Felony—Shadow Phantom?, Am.J.Legal Hist. 189, 283 (1964). Chief Marshall stated: "It accuse every offender, proclaim comes knowledge; punish performing too man." Marbury Brooks, Wheat. 556, 575-576, 522 (1822). characterization "intransigency." Except participants, quite helpful. voluntarily Ms. Attorney. time, conceded idea automobile ferry city." 35. car agreed interviewed. interview, confessed, implicated co-conspirator, relies MacKinnon's distributor." 557, Of plead heroin. Each punishable fine, 1- 4-year terms. single "in phone counts." 28. challenged assertion. took settled aggravating Compare Garcia, 544 681, 684-686 (CA3 1976) (improper factor), Rogers, 504 1079 (CA5 1974) (same), Chaidez-Castro, 430 766 (CA7 1970) (proper factor). hold amounted "an intentional relinquishment abandonment privilege," Johnson Zerbst, 304 458, 464, 1019, 1023, 1461 (1938), me extraordinarily traditional indulgence 'every presumption waiver' rights." (citation omitted). respect, deliberate perjury Perjury itself 'Manipulative defiance law,' 1974), corrupts notes, 3577 provides codification standards set forth (1949). Nothing legislative suggests congressional intention overturn limit historic powers supervision cases Mesarosh 352 77 8, (1956). warrant conclusion 3577, codify existing practices, operates bar safeguard F. Pollock Maitland, 582-583 1909). expresses "doubt 'enhancing' 'leniency' cooperated." Lumbard thing extend willing government; another administer offense." Ramos, 572 360, 363, 1978) (concurring opinion). most, difficult administer; one, appearing similar form areas extending pleads augmenting elects trial. Araujo, 539 287 1976); Derrick, 519 (CA6 Stockwell, 472 1186 (CA9 1973); Thompson, 476 1196, 1201 Scott 135 377, 419 264 (1969). Writing Maher Roe, 432 475-477, 2376, 2383, 53 484 closely analogous "between direct encouragement alternative consonant policy." (In "state activity" impermissible. 482-490, 2383 dissenting); 454-462, 2394-2398 (MARSHALL, dissenting). objection induce part defendant.) agrees prosecuting granting leniency. Cooperation, like step toward corollary inference, means unlikely, follow. Second setting: "[W]hile true lack permit infer leave much testify desire, get back associates obtain better deal Government. event, testify, particularly cases, well-founded family." DiGiovanni 596 74, 75

Category: 0