California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Mobed, G055510 (Cal. App. 2019):
"A statement is involuntary if it is not the product of '"a rational intellect and free will."'" (People v. Maury (2003) 30 Cal.4th 342, 404.) "To determine the voluntariness of a confession, courts examine '"whether a defendant's will was overborne" by the circumstances surrounding the giving of a confession.' [Citation.] In making this determination, courts apply a 'totality of the circumstances' test, looking at the nature of the interrogation and the circumstances relating to the particular defendant. [Citations.] With respect to the interrogation, among the factors to be considered are '"'the crucial element of police coercion [citation]; the length of the interrogation [citation]; its location [citation]; its continuity'. . . ."' [Citation.] With respect to the defendant, the relevant factors are '"'the defendant's maturity [citation]; education [citation]; physical condition [citation]; and mental health.'"' [Citation.] 'A statement is
Page 9
involuntary [citation] when, among other circumstances, it "was '"extracted by any sort of threats . . . , [or] obtained by any direct or implied promises . . . ."'"'" (People v. Dykes (2009) 46 Cal.4th 731, 752.)
In reviewing a trial court's determination of voluntariness, we accept a trial court's factual findings, provided they are supported by substantial evidence, but independently review the ultimate legal question of whether a confession was voluntary. (People v. Dykes, supra, 46 Cal.4th at pp. 752-753.)
3. Factual Background
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.