Document: 386 U.S. 707 87 S.Ct. 1338 18 L.Ed.2d 423 Marvin CLEWIS, Petitioner,v.STATE OF TEXAS. No. 648. Argued March 15, 1967. Decided April 24, Reagan H. Legg, Midland, Tex., for petitioner. Gilbert J. Pena, Laredo, respondent. Mr. Justice FORTAS delivered the opinion of Court. 1 Petitioner, Peterson Clewis, stands convicted murder, by strangulation, his wife, Dorothy Mae Clewis. The jury which found him guilty imposed a sentence 25 years' imprisonment. During course trial, petitioner moved to exclude from evidence three statements he had made while in police custody. Petitioner claimed that these not been voluntarily made, and their use against at trial would deny due process law, as guaranteed Fourteenth Amendment Constitution.1 Evidence was taken court outside jury's presence, structed verdict new both motion overruled.2 Petitioner's third, last, written confession then introduced over objection. question its voluntariness presented jury, which, general verdict, resolved constitutional objection statement renewed motions instructed judge overruled. On appeal, Court Criminal Appeals Texas affirmed judgment conviction, —- S.W.2d —-. That reviewed record concluded it could hold 'that there are any undisputed facts rendered inadmissible matter law.' We disagree, we reverse. 2 determination is whether, considering 'totality circumstances,'3 Clewis' were voluntary third should have excluded. approach this an independent examination whole record, our established practice cases.4 Our recent observation Davis v. State North Carolina, 384 737, 741, 86 1761, 1764, 16 895 (1966), applies equally here: 'As almost invariably so cases involving confessions obtained through unobserved interrogation, conflict testimony events surrounding interrogations.' For purpose deciding case, need go beyond State's version facts. Accordingly, do consider petitioner's claim subjected physical assaults. 3 case prior date decision Miranda Arizona, 436, 1602, 694 requirements therefore, directly applicable, Johnson New Jersey, 719, 1772, 882 although relevant on issue voluntariness, 6 (1966). 4 into custody about a.m. Sunday, July 8, 1962, first gave late afternoon Monday, 9. Thereafter, before magistrate. view most favorable State, held some 38 hours being magistrate be charged, little sleep very food, appeared sick. He visited briefly once or twice, but no contact with lawyer. consistently denied all knowledge wife's death until point agreed give statement, confessed killing her way (by shooting) that—it later developed—was inconsistent facts.5 5 next Thursday, 12. leading up second 'confession' may summarized: having formally unrepresented unadvised counsel, interrogated fairly frequently several different officers Monday evening Thursday afternoon.6 period driven round trip 600 miles, administered polygraph tests, detained least buildings, apparently eat except policemen. Despite this, face earlier 'confession,' steadfastly guilt—or even respect finally produced 'confession.' Friday, 13, Clewis Midland County Sheriff. remained county jail Tuesday, 17. time interrogated, abused, adequate food sleep. did not, however, consult 7 At 9:30 a.m., 17, again two deputy sheriffs. began denying guilt connection death. No lawyer present, nor advised right one appointed. District Attorney arrived, shortly thereafter time. There warning remain silent given oral confession. About 10:45 preparation begun, following formal make it. Shortly thereafter, signed trial. 8 cannot voluntary. It plainly facts, separated circumstances 'confessions.' here break stream Sunday morning when station Tuesday nine days issue, sufficient insulate effect went before. Compare United States Bayer, 331 532, 540, 67 1394, 1398, 91 L.Ed. 1654 (1947) Reck Pate, 367 433, 444, 81 1541, 1548, 948 (1961). 9 Among factors require conclusion following: 10 (1) long custody, never fully counsel appointed if necessary, entitled silent, anything said used him. Cf. U.. (1966); Even after arraigned, counsel. Post-arraignment more than week, occurred without presence accused, waiver thereof. 11 (2) secured initial taking-into-custody concededly supported probable cause,7 followed intermittent interrogation—despite rule accused 'immediately.' Code Crim.Proc. Art. 217 (1925); now, substantially revised other respects, Arts. 14.06, 15.17 (1965). This prolonged, intermittent, interrogation numerous officers, punctuated gravesite another town, accompanied tests. makes clear intended merely secure information, specifically designed elicit 'the truth'—and truth' repudiated each truth 12 (3) inspires substantial concern extent faculties impaired inadequate sickness, subjection anyone police. factor takes additional weight petitioner, Negro, only fifth-grade education. trouble law 13 foregoing reasons, below must is,8 reversed. 14 Reversed. 15 BLACK, CLARK, HARLAN concur result. also violated securing confessions. Massiah States, 377 201, 84 1199, 246 (1964). findings Some eight months certified (third) fact 'belated entry filing court's findings' accepted supplement transcript Appeals. Fikes Alabama, 352 191, 197, 77 281, 284, (1957). See also, e.g., Haynes Washington, 373 503, 83 1336, 513 (1963). 741 742, 1764—1765 Most abuse related allegedly during period. contends attorney morning. insists conference took place Friday In event, does dispute subject discussed fee, declined represent arresting officer testified asked accompany station. cause arrest Plainly, considered either came get him, police, conduct, effectively asserted detain indefinitely jail. Wong Sun 371 471, 407, 441 (1963), inapplicable state trials—an upon express herein, since find grounds. production confessions, necessary support manner eliciting them inadmissible. might central defense can scarcely doubted; example, out hearing suppress initially wife shooting her—a contrary known discovered—and inconsistency lends nonvoluntariness. Perhaps inconsistencies shown, access Under amended Rule Federal Rules Procedure, federal defendant could, discover own statements; seems under 1965 39.14, pretrial discovery proper. Dennis 855, 871, 1840, 1850, 973, n. 17 has suggested denial refused Cicenia La Gay, 357 504, 510 511, 78 1297, 1300—1301, 1523 (1958); Leland Oregon, 343 790, 801—802, 72 .C t. 1002, 1008—1009, 96 1302 (1952). light disposition reach question.

Category: 0