Court Opinion

ID: 9745559
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 23:09:51.566073+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:25:02.561211
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE GOLDENHERSH, concurring in part and dissenting in part: For the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion in People v. Martin (1984), 102 Ill. 2d 412, I disagree with that portion of the majority opinion which approves the deceptive practice employed in obtaining defendant Lee’s incriminating statement. To so hold violate^ the pronouncement in Miranda v. Arizona (1966), 384 U.S. 436, 476, 16 L. Ed. 2d 694, 725, 86 S. Ct. 1602, 1629: “[A]ny evidence that the accused was threatened, tricked, or cajoled into a waiver [of the fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination] will, of course, show that the defendant did not voluntarily waive his privilege.” JUSTICE SIMON joins in this partial concurrence and partial dissent.