The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Boy, 19 F.3d 30 (9th Cir. 1994):
Appellant next asserts that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress certain statements made after a polygraph examination. Appellant argued in his motion, and argues on appeal, that his statements were coerced and involuntary. We review the district court's finding concerning voluntariness under the clearly erroneous standard. United States v. Doe, 819 F.2d 206, 208-09 (9th Cir.1985). In deciding whether a confession is voluntary, we look at the totality of the circumstances to determine whether law enforcement officers have coerced the defendant. Haynes v. Washington, 373 U.S. 503, 513-14 (1963).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.