Legal Document

538 U.S. 760 CHAVEZv.MARTINEZ. No. 01-1444. Supreme Court of United States. Argued December 4, 2002. Decided May 27, 2003. While respondent Martinez was being treated for gunshot wounds received during an altercation with police, he interrogated by petitioner Chavez, a patrol supervisor. admitted that used heroin and had taken officer's gun the incident. At no point given Miranda warnings. Although never charged crime, his answers were against him in any criminal proceeding, filed 42 U. S. C. § 1983 suit, maintaining, among other things, Chavez's actions violated Fifth Amendment right not to be "compelled case witness himself," Fourteenth substantive due process free from coercive questioning. The District ruled Chavez entitled qualified immunity, Ninth Circuit affirmed, finding questioning Martinez's rights even though statements police officer violates when obtains confession conduct, regardless whether is subsequently at trial. Held: judgment reversed, remanded. 270 F. 3d 852, reversed JUSTICE THOMAS, joined THE CHIEF JUSTICE, O'CONNOR, SCALIA, concluded Part II-A did deprive rights. Pp. 766-773. 1 (a) An immunity if alleged conduct violate constitutional right. See Saucier v. Katz, 533 194, 201. text Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause cannot support Circuit's view mere compulsive Constitution. A "criminal case" very least requires initiation legal proceedings, does constitute such case. Statements compelled interrogation may defendant case, but it until use violated, see States Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 259, 264. made "witness" himself because as testimony Nor ever placed under oath exposed "`the cruel trilemma self-accusation, perjury or contempt.'" Michigan Tucker, 417 433, 445. 766-767. 2 (b) approach also irreconcilable this Court's law. government compel witnesses testify trial before grand jury, on pain contempt, so long target which testifies, see, e. g., Kastigar States, 406 441, 443; has permitted compulsion incriminating (or evidence derived them) speaker id., 458. more than immunized forced contempt. That knows him, while likely not, make witness' less lends conclusion interrogations alone Amendment. Moreover, those subjected have automatic protection their involuntary subsequent trial, Oregon Elstad, 470 298, 307-308, coextensive derivative mandated Kastigar. 767-770. 3 (c) fact privilege asserted noncriminal cases alter Judicially created prophylactic rules — rule allowing insist agreement give cases, exclusionary are designed safeguard core protected Clause. They do extend scope itself, just violations person's Accordingly, failure read warnings grounds action. And absence defeats claim. 770-773. 4 SOUTER delivered opinion respect II, concluding issue pursue claim liability violation should addressed remand. 779-780. 5 SOUTER, BREYER, I Amendments subject redress damages action, outside protection, could recognized guarantee, judicial capacity protect it, would risk absent complementary McCarthy Arndstein, 266 34, 40. However, "powerful showing" necessary expand self-incrimination civil requests. Inherent purely global application every instance producing statement inadmissible Amendments, violating one accepted aid privilege. offered reason believe new basic guarantee. 777-779. 6 J., announced opinion, REHNQUIST, full, Parts II-A, II. II STEVENS, KENNEDY, GINSBURG, JJ., concurred post, p. 777. concurring part judgment, 780. dissenting part, 783. full III, 789. 799. 7 CERTIORARI TO UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR NINTH CIRCUIT. 8 Lawrence Robbins argued cause petitioner. With briefs Roy T. Englert, Jr., Kathryn Zecca, Alan E. Wisotsky, Jeffrey Held, Gary L. Gillig. 9 Deputy Solicitor General Clement amicus curiae urging reversal. brief Olson, Assistant Attorney Chertoff, McCallum, John P. Elwood, Barbara Herwig, Peter R. Maier. 10 Richard Paz respondent. Sonia Mercado.* 11 THOMAS opinion.* 12 This involves suit arising out Ben allegedly Oliverio Martinez. Appeals held defense clearly established We conclude 13 * On November 28, 1997, officers Maria Peña Andrew Salinas near vacant lot residential area Oxnard, California, investigating suspected narcotics activity. individual, they heard bicycle approaching darkened path crossed lot. ordered rider, Martinez, dismount, spread legs, place hands behind head. complied. then conducted patdown frisk discovered knife waistband. ensued.1 14 There some dispute about what occurred altercation. drew Salinas' its holster pointed them; denies this. Both sides agree, however, yelled, "`He's got my gun!'" App. Pet. Cert. 3a. her shot several times, causing severe injuries left permanently blinded paralyzed waist down. arrest. 15 Petitioner supervisor, arrived scene minutes later paramedics. accompanied hospital questioned there receiving treatment medical personnel. interview lasted total minutes, over 45-minute period, leaving emergency room periods time permit personnel attend 16 first, most consisted "I don't know," am dying," choking." 14, 17, 18. Later interview, took police. Id., 16. He regularly. point, said telling you anything treat me," yet continued interview. 14. Arizona, 384 436 (1966). 4a. 17 prosecution. Nevertheless, Rev. Stat. 1979, 1983, maintaining well granted summary both claims. interlocutory appeal Circuit, affirmed denial immunity. 852 (2001). Applying 194 (2001), first actions, deprived Amendments. attempt explain how been himself." Instead, reiterated holding earlier Cooper Dupnik, 963 2d 1220, 1229 (1992) (en banc), "the purpose prevent practices destructive human dignity," 3d, 857 (internal quotation marks omitted), found "coercive questioning" rights, "[e]ven proceeding," ibid. As claim, "a trial." Ibid. 18 federal law, explaining reasonable "would known persistent suspect despite repeated requests stop suspect's interrogation." 858. 19 certiorari. 535 1111 (2002). 20 In deciding we must determine S., If need consider "clearly established." allegations fail state 21 22 Amendment, applicable Malloy Hogan, 378 (1964), "[n]o person ... shall Const., Amdt. (emphases added). how, based can allege right, since prosecuted let 23 contends meaning encompass entire investigatory process, including interrogations, Brief Respondent 23, disagree. our view, proceedings. Blyew Wall. 581, 595 (1872) ("The words `case' `cause' constantly synonyms statutes decisions, each proceeding court, action" (emphasis added)); Black's Law Dictionary 215 (6th ed. 1990) (defining "[c]ase" "[a] general term cause, controversy law ...; question contested court justice" added)). decide today precise moment commences; enough say "case" private investigator's precomplaint activities "civil case." course Brown Mississippi, 297 278, 286 (1936), occurs, 264 (1990) guaranteed fundamental defendants. enforcement officials prior ultimately impair occurs only trial" added; citations omitted)); Withrow Williams, 507 680, 692 (1993) (describing "`trial right'"); 705 (O'CONNOR, part) "true claims" extraction testimony" altered)). 24 Here, 445 (1974) (quoting Murphy Waterfront Comm'n N. Y. Harbor, 52, 55 (1964)). simply questioning, without more, 25 reconciled It testifies. Minnesota Murphy, 465 420, 427 (1984); 443 (1972). Even persons who legitimate fear them prosecution, statements) Walker, 161 591, 602-604 (1896); Kastigar, supra, 458; Balsys, 524 666, 671-672 (1998). governments penalize public employees contractors (with loss jobs contracts) induce respond inquiries, elicited (and fruits) speaker. Lefkowitz Turley, 414 70, 84-85 (1973) ("[T]he State [contractors] either relevant inquiries performance contracts suffer cancellation"); Cunningham, 431 801, 806 (1977) ("Public constitutionally discharged refusing answer potentially questions concerning official duties required surrender immunity" proceedings).2 By contrast, "penalty" imposed someone exercises Griffin 380 609, 614 (1965) (the court's prosecutor's comments defendant's Amendment). Our holdings these demonstrate that, contrary coercion witness. 26 himself" One difference, perhaps, will whereas not. But "compelled" provide 307-308 (1985); Blue, 251, 255 (1966); Leyra Denno, 347 556, 558 (1954); Ashcraft Tennessee, 322 143, 155 (1944). Pillsbury Co. Conboy, 459 248, 278 (1983) (Blackmun, judgment); Williams 401 646, 662 (1971) (Brennan, result). is, fact, compels reluctant 453. know change here. 27 444-445 (recognizing "Fifth compulsory criminal, administrative judicial, adjudicatory ..."); 77 (stating allows "not put formal informal, where might incriminate future proceedings"), 28 context, See, 444 "procedural safeguards" themselves Constitution measures insure protected" "provide practical reinforcement right"); 306 "[t]he serves sweeps broadly itself"). Among evidentiary protects testimony, unless compelled. 453; Maness Meyers, 419 449, 461-462 (1975) (noting produce accused 29 preserves invasion 440-441 ("Testimony obtained suits, legislative committees, [absent grant immunity] prove readily convicted basis disclosures proceeding"). Because assert often forfeit exclude case," 440; Garner 424 648, 650 (1976) (failure disclosing information tax returns forfeited prosecution); Kordel, 397 1, (1970) (criminal regard gave interrogatories proceeding), allow assertion commencement situations, proceedings deemed "voluntary," Rogers 340 367, 371 (1951); Monia, 317 424, (1943); hence, insistence essential memorialize indeed therefore 30 Rules judicially crafted person. explained, allowed order defined oneself.3 likewise measure admission into confessions through custodial Warren Lincoln, 864 1436, 1442 (CA8 1989) (alleged actionable 1983); Giuffre Bissell, 31 1241, 1256 (CA3 1994) (same); Bennett Passic, 545 1260, 1263 (CA10 1976) New York Quarles, 467 649, 686 (1984) (Marshall, dissenting) ("All forbids introduction coerced trial"). Connecticut Barrett, 479 523, 528 (1987) (Miranda's warning requirement itself Amendmen[t] instead justified reference purpose"); safeguards "were protected"). Clause, 857; California Attorneys Criminal Justice Butts, 195 1039, 1045-1046 (1999); Cooper, 2d, 1243-1244, finds law.4 find reverse views proper mean torture abuse results permissible trial; means Due Process rather govern inquiry relief appropriate circumstances.5 B 32 provides "of life, liberty, property, law." Convictions methods "so brutal offensive dignity" "shoc[k] conscience" Rochin 342 165, 172, 174 (1952) (overturning conviction stomach pumping). Breithaupt Abram, 352 432, 435 (1957) (reiterating "`shock[s] conscience'" conviction). establish remedy abusive behavior, County Sacramento Lewis, 523 833, 846 (1998), deprivations liberty caused egregious conduct," 846, 847-848, n. 8, rejected, plaintiff's contention deliberate indifference high-speed chase death motorcyclist 854, open possibility unauthorized behavior contexts "shock rise liability. 850. 33 satisfied assuming, arguendo, somehow interest, agree characterization "egregious" "conscience shocking." noted "most conscience-shocking level" "conduct intended injure way unjustifiable interest." 849. acted harm intentionally interfering treatment. Medical able throughout 4a, 18a, ceased tests procedures performed. exacerbated prolonged stay hospital. investigate misconduct constituted justifiable interest key lost died authorities hearing side story. 34 certain "fundamental interest[s]" deprivation government, provided, infringement narrowly tailored serve compelling interest. Washington Glucksberg, 521 702, 721 (1997). Only liberties "`deeply rooted Nation's history tradition'" "`implicit concept liberty'" qualify protection. Many expressed reluctance doctrine 842; 720; Albright Oliver, 510 266, 271 (1994); Reno Flores, 292, 302 (1993); large "because guideposts responsible decisionmaking unchartered scarce open-ended," Collins Harker Heights, 503 115, 125 (1992). Regents Univ. Mich. Ewing, 474 214, 225-226 (1985). 35 Glucksberg "`careful description'" purposes analysis; vague generalities, talked to," suffice. 721. take account hospitalized critical nonpolice resulting shooting officer, situation urgent perceived die crucial lost. circumstances, jurisprudence, Miranda, 477-478 ("It act citizenship individuals whatever enforcement"), traditions suppose freedom unwanted abridged "compelling 302. justification interrogation, decline lack "guideposts decisionmaking" area, oft-stated further counsel recognizing interest" 36 failed unnecessary inquire established. III 37 remanded 38 ordered. Notes: Briefs ofamici reversal ex rel. Bill Lockyer Mr. Lockyer, General, pro se, Robert Anderson, Chief Jo Graves, Senior Stan Cross, Supervising Lee Seale Patrick J. Whalen, General; City Escondido Epp Schneider; 50 Cities et al. Girard Fisher; Legal Foundation Kent Scheidegger Charles Hobson; National Association Police Organizations Devallis Rutledge William Johnson. amici affirmance American Civil Liberties Union Mark D. Rosenbaum, Steven Shapiro, Susan Herman, Philipsborn, Erwin Chemerinsky; Trial Lawyers America Needle; Accountability Project Klein Michael Avery. joins entirety. O'CONNOR opinion. SCALIA parties disagree triggered maintain ran away tackled pursuit; asserts attempted flee waive theirimmunity Uniformed Sanitation Men Assn., Inc. Commissioner York, 392 280 (1968); 70 (1973), true secured constructed invasion. II-A-3, infra. Once waiver signed, signatory unable objection prospective condition employment Lefkowitz, 85. penalty to, of, KENNEDY'S conspicuous single citation actual permits adopt interpretation Mincey 437 385 (1978), KENNEDY GINSBURG rely reading addressing admissibility mention refutes GINSBURG'S assertions interrogation. light ofGraham Connor, 490 386 (1989), extract suspect" same "torture equivalent statement" Post, 795, 796 (opinion part). Graham foreclosed analysis claims involving excessive force effecting arrest governed solely Fourth prohibitions "unreasonable" seizures, provided explicit source conduct. 394-395. If, believes, governs suggests judgment.* rejected write separately decision degree discretionary greater acknowledges. points out, (applied here incorporation) focuses courtroom compelled, self-incriminating guarantee exclusion evidence. makes clear present close toMincey him. asking hold completed action 1983. To recognize compensation would, course, sufficient reject Harlan explained dissent (1966), "extension[s]" bare warranted, 510, shown desirable invasive pressures contemporary society, 515. light, sense variety holdings: barring testimonial 40 (1924); requiring advance proffer, 446-447 (1972); precluding threats impositions penalties undermine 280, 284-285 77-79 (1973); 804-806 (1977); McKune Lile, 536 24, (2002) (plurality opinion); conditioning waivers promote intelligent choices simplify voluntariness, supra. All core, expressing showing," realistic assessment costs risks, asks us Seeid., 515, 517 (Harlan, dissenting). obvious drawback inherent principles, use. obtaining stand-alone compensation, why whenever obtain statement, much threatens derogation honor Miranda?* offers limiting principle foresee stopping short all cases. Recognizing revolutionize beg inform extension recognition service privilege: guarantee? ineffective many circumstances vindication depended excluding admissions penalties. systemically defective respect. efficacy infecting existing body argument depend feature upon particular charge outrageous extending initial encounter Chavez. raised sound process. generally 849 (1998) ("[C]onduct sort level"). STEVENS shows serious position. Whether thus remand, along merits BREYER join ofMiranda circumstance Court. judgment. rejection himself1 ante, 766-767 777-779 (SOUTER, judgment). (what plurality call "core"), doomed. Section remedies rules, holds, 772 789-790 (KENNEDY, part); nor concerned "extensions" provisions cf. 777-778 judgment).2 Rather, plaintiff seeking statutory Blessing Freestone, 520 329, (1997); Golden Transit Corp. Los Angeles, 493 103, 106 (1989). My reasons rejecting set forth THOMAS'S II-B, deals Consideration absolutely For after discussing erroneously deciding) follows: "Likewise, `The law-enforcement pursuit complete itself.... affront Constitution.' 1244-45 stated prima facie Sergeant confession." seems me impossible interpret passage invocation "substantive process," unlawful procedural guarantees Rights) violated. 702 sure, process" quoted passage, passage's technically false dichotomy between uses "Fourteenth rights" stand-in aspect consists (JUSTICE similar shorthand sentence analysis: "Our cases." Ante, 773.) What possible possess? Surely expending paragraph utterly useless observation addition (because incorporated Fourteenth) incorporates Fifth). confirmed sole authority cited Amendment" 1244-1245 (1992), explicitly substantive-due-process 1244-1250. Since rested disturb disagreement (Self-Incrimination Clause) independent ground supporting declines address extensively briefed issue, 21-36; 29-40; Reply 8-12; Amicus Curiae 17-23, discusses dissent, 787-788 resolving respondent, disposition, reverses remand "[w]hether violation."Ante, 779 (majority opinion). already decided decision. Court, little consequence, prevail raising anew Not meritless, demonstrates, 774-776, chance press theory chose precedent (including Government's oral argument, Tr. Oral Arg. "shocks criterion) available 1248 ("There second yardstick test Task Force's `shocks conscience'"). Nowhere respondent's appellate process"; Appellees' Responding 00-56520 (CA9), pp. 28-32, 36-43. apparently below forfeited. occasionally referring claim," convention commonly followed, acknowledge onlythrough "made States," 766 J.), citing (1964). Still inconsistent "purpose" provision. CfMartinez (CA9 2001) omitted)). part. matter functional prisoner torturous methods. type constitutes immediate prisoner's liberty. propositions clear, correctly follows English translation portions tape-recorded Spanish when, evident text, believed die: "Chavez: happened? Olivero, tell happened. "O[liverio] M[artinez]: know. happened (sic)? "O.M.: Ay! dying. doing me? "No, ...! (unintelligible scream). happened, sir? foot hurts Olivera. Sir, choking. Tell `I know.' leg hurts. Hey, hey look. Can hear? look listen, Benjamin "O. M.: dying, please. OK, yes, going die, Look (sic) You know, Did talk police? Yes. fought. Huh? me. Why? fighting Oh, dying yes fighting, . Doctor, please want air, OK. [to yourself] Yes, yourself]? gun? listen ok?? (sic), tape Ok, look, Look, you? Uuuggghhh! belly Nothing, run anymore. No? me, lot, there? die. Well now think die? No, Aren't what? that's Right now, hurts, Sir? everything, no. now? so. so? Ok. doctors help do, Ok?. do. Get moving, can't come on. Ah, huh, giving medication." 8-22. recording lodged vividly demonstrates suffering mental anguish petitioner's "`shocks conscience,' 172 (1952), interferes `implicit liberty,' Palko Connecticut, 319, 325-326 (1937)." Salerno, 481 739, 746 (1987). Palko, majority refused standard. host unusually standard.1 terms, protections "implicit liberty" guarantees. Indeed, (1985), specific provision Rights "that citizens kind once employed Star Chamber, `the Germans 1930's early 1940's,' own departments few decades ago."2 Whenever here, character classic example liberty."3 respectfully articulated KENNEDY,post, 799, concur SOUTER'S listed courts, inOregon 312-313, (1985): "Darwin 391 346 (1968) (suspect 48 hours incommunicado denied access counsel); Beecher Alabama, 389 35, (1967) (officer fired rifle next ear `If truth kill you'); Clewis Texas, 707 arrested probable nine days food sleep, three unwarned `confessions' immediately retracted); Reck Pate, 367 439-440, (1961) (mentally retarded youth week `during frequently ill, fainted vomited blood floor station twice stretcher').... Cagle State, 45 Ala. 3, 221 So. 119, 120 (1969) (police wounded hour treated, warnings; prefaced you, too'), cert. denied, 284 727, 121 (1969); People Saiz, 620 (Colo. 1980) (two hours' 16-year-old parent's presence, culminating visit crime); Bodner, 75 Div. 440, 430 433 (1980) (confrontation crime age eight nine); Badger, 141 Vt. 430, 450 A. 336, 343 (1982) (unwarned `close intense' house 15-year-old, promises, resulted 1:20 a.m.; `[w]arnings insufficient cure blatant compensate case')." Adding appended footnote: "See,e. 556 Malinski 324 (1945); 143 (1944); Ward 316 547 (1942); Vernon 313 (1941); White 310 530 (1940); Canty 309 629 Chambers Florida, 227 (1936); Wakat Harlib, 253 59 (CA7 1958); La Frana, Ill. 261, 122 583 Portelli, 235, 205 (potential tortured police). Such closer Soviet scheme tolerates. Coleman 399 15-16 Douglas, J.) (`In [Russia] detention common practice, period extends months. Where stage takes formalities commence. apparent attends trials Russia. Those viewed guilt; guilt resolved inner precincts prison police')." 371-372, (dissenting remain silent impairment THOMAS' fundamentally flawed two respects. incorrectly assumes rejects claim,ante, 772-773, unconstitutional merely judge-made "prophylactic" rule. far advise rights; moreover, disavowed Dickerson 428, 437-439 (2000). whom joins, presents issues: underMiranda 1983; second, arose (applicable Amendment) failing warn, extraordinary pressure elicit confession. aMiranda ensues. involve simple warning, respectful submission incorrect. arise privileged introduced proceeding. traduced equivalents brought bear. Constitutional abeyance place. These premises separate TheMiranda settled, adopted reduce implement (2000); 467. mandates exclusion. characterized, significant exceptions assessed determined Unwarned Miranda. 649 (statement admissible safety). Furthermore, instances. Harris 222 impeachment). identification consequences, then, ought statements, within exception, remedy. wrong, instances occur direct commanding it. remembered (1964); 615 (1965). context dispute. tradition constraint governing work courts. assurance declarant Otherwise too prohibits. individual demanded future. "It adjudicatory; reasonably believes prosecution lead used." (1972) (footnotes omitted). described exemption duty. duty immediate, exercise depends statement. Again, indicates existence continuing bring self-incrimination. involuntarily called privileges proceedings"); accord, Bram 168 532, 542-543 (1897); Counselman Hitchcock, 142 547, 562 (1892). forbid policies exert forfeiting ("These settle imposing sanctions immunized"); Gardner Broderick, 273, 279 (1968). 777-778; 769. end matter. negate Their position ("Although [against self-incrimination], extent Verdugo-Urquidez involved investigation another country, 274-275, special 269 "rejected aliens sovereign territory States" (citing Johnson Eisentrager, 339 763 (1950))). event, proposition limited describe today. recent illustrates consequences. Just last Term, Justices proceeded premise present, incarcerated admit past crimes assigned harsher conditions confinementMcKune (2002); 54 (STEVENS, No Member suggested pending irrelevant. resolution, easy reconcile. difficult. instances, witness, Gardner, 276, others promise Shapiro 335 (1948). correct note ordered, granted. follow establishes absolute. seeks strips meaning. small unwelcome surprise judges, attorneys, citizenry whole committee judge demands offering imposes comply, there. submit, understanding prevailed generations now. system conducting diminish celebrated Rights. survives people share common, historic commitment principles preserve freedom. Today's undermines respected precepts. Dean Griswold heritage: "The nearly lone sure rock storm. thing quite firm, although something like juggernaut pushed has, thus, vicissitudes, symbol ultimate moral community, upholding best us, otherwise good deal wavering times." Griswold, Today 73 (1955). vocabulary impart generation next, downgrade requires. authority, acknowledged, torturing comprehended itself. convictions stand, identified ruling. 285. interpreted processes justice testify. Compulsion extort different matter." antedated incorporation ensuing role system. academic support. Professor McNaughton, revision Wigmore's treatise evidence, recites various rationales declaring insufficient. Wigmore, Evidence 2251 (J. McNaughton rev. 1961). 11th prevention torture, 315, practice assures revived, convincing. abuses forbidden inquest, relation quickly discounted. Chamber revive, specter Sheriff Screws, Screws 325 91 (1945), deputies beat defendants easily banished. 312, suspect. otherwise, implicates larger definition Dickerson, ("Over time, bases voluntary evidence: Amendment"). Turning essential, specific, individual's Brown, 285; 319 (1937); 165 (1952). countenance imposition broader both. brings Had inflicted sustained wounds) extracting Constitution, needed. however. suffered events preceding True, injuries, done facilitating analyzed, third person, came interrogate. interrogating suspects pain. reasons, borne exigency, distress. Locating victim kidnaping, ascertaining whereabouts dangerous assailant accomplice, determining rogue examples. furthermore, show opposite. motivating factor volunteer information. imminent status Mattox 146 140, 152 (1892) necessity, consideration expectation almost remove temptation falsehood, enforce strict adherence obligation impose"); Fed. Rule Evid. 804(b)(2) (providing exception hearsay uttered belief impending death). story increases agony opportunity wishes reveal. are, prohibition respected. prolong increase will. render accountable increased impression alleviated cooperates, too, one, recovery complainant exploited intent securing showing transcript 784-786 part), considered thought delayed, worsened, refusal questions. continuous. Ten interval. 27a. Treatment administered interruptions. pauses indicate error findings conclusions. "had face, eyes injured; screaming pain, coming consciousness repeatedly details police." 22a. His blinding facial visually distinguish attending effort dispel perception withheld answered assurances cooperation voluntary. begged desist wounds, persisted pleas unequivocal Cf. 385, 398 (1978) (Court circumstances: hard imagine conducive rational intellect will" standards accommodate exigencies enough, steps ensure neither declarant's record supports exploiting affirm stated. opinions today, reach conclusions disposition Were adhere position, controlling ruling secures, consideration. therein, applies Seeante, 790-798 page explains, questions." 797. delay treatment, create impression, permissible. appropriately referenced 798, in-hospital interrogation.1 "seriously earlier," "[a]lthough [the] still sufficiently intensive care unit." 398. "lying back bed, encumbered tubes, needles, breathing apparatus." 399. Despite indications talk, drifted consciousness. "apparent" product choice." strikingly resembles hospital-bed Mincey. Like Mincey, "at mercy [his interrogator], escape resist thrust notes, 798 CV 98-9313 (CD Cal., July 31, 2000), 7, 22a). "In debilitated helpless condition, [Martinez] wish interrogated." nonetheless "ceas[ing] intervals treatment." 401. "weakened shock"; "barely conscious, overborne." 401-402. Thus, interference totality [Martinez's] voluntarily given." 98-9313, 22a; 2001). "hard will." 398); 783 (characterizing methods"); 2251, 827 (1923) common-law jurisprudence ward off: pleasanter sit comfortably shade rubbing red pepper poor devil's go sun hunting up evidence." deleted internal omitted)).2 arbitrary power governmental authorities." 51 Closely connected "with struggle eliminate practice," rightly regarded "one great landmarks man's civilized," 7. Its idea captured Latin maxim, "Nemo tenetur prodere se ipsum," English, "No accuse 2. "expression civilized 9, instruct control officialdom, prosecutor. Convinced spared Appeals. assure 799 SOUTER's WhileMincey nature instructive 433-434 eyewitness, local farm worker Eluterio 1; Defendants' Opposition Plaintiff's Motion Summary Adjudication Issues, Record Cal.), 3;id., E (transcript videotaped deposition Flores). reveal Flores encounter.

Classification Label: 0