CONSTITUTIONAL LAW--DUE PROCESS-FEDERAL RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF CONFESSIONS IN STATE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

Authors

F. L. Adamson, University of Michigan Law SchoolFollow

Abstract

Undisputed evidence established that petitioner, a negro boy of fifteen, was arrested at about midnight, October 19, 1945 and taken to police headquarters. He was questioned by the police with no friend or counsel present. He was not informed of his right to counsel or of his right to refuse to answer. At about five in the morning, October 20, he confessed. He was then informed of his rights and his statement taken and transcribed. He was photographed by a newspaper photographer, and then placed in jail. On October 23 he was, for the first time, taken before a magistrate and charged with murder. While the accused was in jail, prior to arraignment but after confessing, a lawyer twice attempted to see him and was refused admittance. His mother was not permitted to see him until October 25. There was ample evidence for a conviction had the confession not been used. The jury which found the confession "to be voluntary returned a verdict of guilty. Conviction was affirmed by the court of appeals, and appeal to the Supreme Court of Ohio was dismissed. On certiorari, held, reversed. The confession was not voluntary and its use at the trial violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Haley v. State, (U.S. 1948) 68 S.Ct. 302.

Recommended Citation

F. L. Adamson, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW--DUE PROCESS-FEDERAL RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF CONFESSIONS IN STATE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS, 46 Mich. L. Rev. 1108 (1948).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol46/iss8/10