Legal Document

400 U.S. 446 91 Supreme Court Reporter 485 27 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 524 R.K. PROCUNIER, Director, California Department of Correctionsv.Veron ATCHLEY. Number 44. Argued Nov. 18, 1970. Decided Jan. 19, 1971. Rehearing Denied March 8, See 401 966, 966. Syllabus Respondent was convicted in 1959 murdering his wife. A recorded statement, made jail to an insurance agent connection with discussion a policy on the life respondent's wife, admitted into evidence at trial. The affirmed conviction finding statement voluntary. later sought federel habeas corpus relief, contending that involuntary. District granted relief ground trial court had excluded relevant issue voluntariness and thus 'did not reliably determine whether (the) confession voluntary or involuntary.' Appeals affirmed. Held: An applicant for federal is entitled new hearing introduced merely because he can point shortcomings state procedure used decide issue, as must also show (which respondent did do this case) version events, if true, would require conclusion Pp. 451—454, 412 Federal Reporter, 2nd 230, reversed. Robert R. Granucci, San Francisco, Cal., petitioner. Charles Atlantic Legge, respondent. Mr. Justice STEWART delivered opinion Court. 1 In jury found guilty wife by firing six bullets her body close range. key prosecution witness Ray Travers, agent. Two days after killed, Travers visited latter's request, two conversed regarding decedent. During course conversation told how been admitting lain wait gun, but insisting shooting accidental. As leaving jail, sheriff's officers about statement. They asked him be willing have next electronically recorded, and, since planned return get additional information company, agreed. Later same day returned another respondent, which again gave substantially account circumstances wife's death. This recorded.1 Over objection defense counsel, recording second detailed testimony verified authenticity recording, orally recounted conversations accuracy Travers' questioned; indeed, when took stand killed given Travers. 2 On appeal California, contended involuntary confession, record supporting had, therefore, wrongly appellate unanimously rejected contention conviction. People versus Atchley, 53 Cal.2d 160, 346 Pacific 764. Proceeding upon proposition 'any accused relative offense charged inadmissible against involuntarily,' Traynor's reasoned follows: 3 'Travers testified no threats were made, inducements offered, earlier defendant volunteered statements without being asked. Defendant time contradicted suggested any untrue. Moreover, demonstrates referred explain why asking questions inducement particular answers. listened tape chambers before ruling its admissibility. There therefore merit defendant's proper showing voluntarily. 4 'Defendant contends obtained such fraud use inconsistent due process. He relies primarily Leyra Denno, 347 556, 74 716, 98 L.Ed. 948 * Although there similar deception present case, comparable mental coercion. itself does render inadmissible, it type reasonably likely procure untrue 5 'While cross-examining statements, counsel attempted ask complained permitted police, despite numerous requests, talk lawyer. sustained question explained answer bearing voluntariness. correctly erroneous, fails prejudicial. refusal permit suggests intent coerce, seems highly improbable either judge inferred coercion from alone light substantial uncontradicted occurred.' Cal.2d, 170—171, P.2d, 769—770. 6 certiorari.2 After argument, we disposed case 7 'After oral argument fully examining record, conclude totality makes them manifest warrant bringing here. Accordingly, writ dismissed.'3 8 1967 initiated proceeding Northern California. decisions rendered subsequent direct established unconstitutionally evidence, accordingly It asserted under criteria stated Johnson New Jersey, 384 719, 86 1772, 16 882, denied access lawyer advised right remain silent; event procedures these constitutionally inadequate Jackson 378 368, 84 1774, 12 908. 9 Court, although making clear 'presently able say involuntary,' nonetheless concluded 'excluded perhaps crucial voluntary' Atchley's 300 F.Supp. 68, 71, 72. thought 'relevant crucial' what police said interview, trying obtain lawyer, deceived motives feigned sympathy, knew finally, intellectual educational qualifications. Because inquiry matters restricted, held wrong standard applied proceeding. ruled courts should involuntary, Appeals4 Judge Barnes dissenting, certiorari.5 10 Jackson, commit determination solely decided guilt constitutional requirement reliable. Concern reliability utilized reflected Townsend Sain, 372 293, 83 745, 770, where court's resolution disputed historical fact could dispositive unless petitioner 'full fair hearing' court.6 11 But those establish courts, courts. Our make Thus supra, reach required until determined, threshold matter, application alleged facts which, deprived rights confession. U.S., 309, 755. We 'the disbelieved Id., 321, 761. And jump premise inadequate, hearing. Instead, pointed out: 'This concerning surrounding are undisputed task only based clearly accordance standards. Here dispute. Whether depends resolved, State believed cannot Jackson's whereas accepted inadmissible.' 391—392, 1789. 13 reason approach obvious. Unless result turns issues fact, rehearing involuntariness incriminating exercise futility, even allegations true. Yet quite evidently failed believed. Rather court, disavowing ability more competently determined (the respondent's) will overborne' explored. F.Supp., 14 place several years Escobedo Illinois, 478, 1758, 977, Miranda Arizona, 436, 1602, 694, retroactive effect. 882. admissibility matter governed, contemporary law elaborating process overborne so free act, resolved circumstances. See, e.g., Davis North Carolina, 737, 1761, 895; Haynes Washington, 373 503, 513—516, 1336, 1342—1344, 513; Spano York, 360 315, 323, 79 1202, 1207, 1265; Ashcraft Tennessee, 322 143, 147—148, 64 921, 923, 88 1192. 15 infer apply correct reviewing assumed truth still dispute, holding silent, giving needed money, confidence, known lower than average intelligence attainments. Of assertedly coercive factors, three went weight other actual Low intelligence, denial failure advise silent themselves coercive. they establishing setting might exerted overcome suspect. Darwin Connecticut, 391 346, 1488, 20 630; Greenwald Wisconsin, 390 519, 1152, 77; supra. circumstance knowledge tend potentially setting. factual confidence court. reported company record. contradicted, disturb finding, implicit believe repeat told. 314, 757, 770. remaining improperly induced suggestion order money children stepchildren. properly answers.' 17 full consideration standards upholding admission evidence. error requiring claims long ago fully, fairly, 18 judgment 19 BLACK concurs all opinion. No charges filed conversations. Cf. Massiah States, 377 201, 1199, 246. 362 987, 80 1081, 1021. 366 207, 81 1051, 233. 230. 397 905, 90 901, 25 86. Congress 1966 amended 28 Code KF62 § 2254 (see 1964 ed., Supp. V), codify most set out Sain.

Classification Label: 0