Opinion ID: 1466430
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Involuntary Statements and Confession

Text: Gannon also contends that the district court erred by denying his motion to suppress because both his statements and confession were involuntarily made. More specifically, Gannon argues that his statements and confession were involuntary because the detectives threatened to imprison Gannon's ex-wife if he did not confess. The test for determining the voluntariness of a confession is whether the police extracted the confession by threats, violence, or direct or implied promises, such that the defendant's will [was] overborne and his capacity for self-determination critically impaired. United States v. Kilgore, 58 F.3d 350, 353 (8th Cir.1995) (alteration in original) (internal quotations omitted). In applying this test, we must consider the totality of the circumstances, including law-enforcement officials' conduct and the defendant's capacity to resist pressure. Id. Gannon's claim that his statements and confession resulted from the detectives' threat that Gannon's ex-wife would be charged is without merit. Below, the district court concluded that no credible evidence suggested that Gannon's statements were involuntary. Specifically, the district court found Gannon's testimony that the officers threatened him incredulous. This was not clear error. And even if we take Gannon's testimony before the magistrate judge as true, there is no evidence, as the test for involuntariness requires, that Gannon's will was overborne and his capacity for self-determination critically impaired; rather, Gannon only testified that his statements were not voluntary because the detectives repeatedly told [him] that unless he confessed, his wife would be charged. In short, Gannon's involuntary-statements-and-confession argument fails.