Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
Degnan, a Special Agent of FBI, identified D as the person depicted in photographs taken during the robbery of a bank. D was arrested. Degnan and Special Agent Fujita went to the prison ward to interview D. They learned for the first time from the hall nurse that D had just returned from surgery for removal of an abscess on her left shoulder caused by the injection of narcotics. The nurse granted them permission to see D. The agents decided to enter and tell her that they had come to interview her but would return the next day because she had just undergone surgery. D was asked if she remembered Degnan. She replied that she did. Agent Fujita then inquired whether D knew him. She replied that he was 'the individual who couldn't run.' On October 15, 1986, Agent Fujita had attempted to catch up with D. D appeared to be in pain. Special Agent Degnan remarked: 'you look kind of rough.' He asked her how she was feeling. She replied: 'O.K.' Degnan asked her whether she was going to 'come clean.' D said that she would. Degnan asked her how many they would talk about. She responded, 'three.' Degnan asked her about the number of robberies to find out if she had committed more than those known by the authorities. If D had stated that she had committed additional robberies, they would have searched their files prior to the interview the next day. The entire period of time spent with D was approximately two minutes. The agents returned the next day. The hall nurse informed them that D was alert and not under any medication which would affect her ability to be interviewed. D appeared to be alert and looked much better than she had the day before. Agent Degnan asked her how she was feeling. She stated 'okay.' Fujita informed her that before she could be interviewed, they had to advise her of her rights. He gave her a copy of the FO 395 Advice of Rights and Waiver Form to read along with him. He then read the form to her. She signed the form to indicate that she waived her right to counsel and was willing to make a statement and answer questions. She also acknowledged by her signature the fact that 'no promises or threats have been made to me and no pressure or coercion of any kind has been used against me.' D admitted committing three robberies, two of the same bank. D filed a motion to suppress the statements as involuntary because she was a 'heroin addict suffering from the effects of drug withdrawal and was questioned in her hospital bed hours after she had awakened from a general anesthetic administered during surgery. The court rejected P’s claims and stated: “Well, you see, I can't go with you on that. One of the reasons why, and I am frank to say, I am influenced by personal experience. I mean, I represent to you that I have never been a heroin addict and I have never experienced what it is like to come out from under heroin, but I have come out from under an anesthetic. And people have told me that -- and I seem to be perfectly all right -- and people have told me that I said the most incredible things during the few first six hours or so after I came out of a general anesthetic. And I have had the same experience related by other people. You are not accountable for what you do or say for quite a number of hours after you come out of a general anesthetic. So I cannot find that a person who is both withdrawing from heroin and coming out from under a general anesthetic and is under arrest and confronted by FBI agents is in a position to make a voluntary and knowing statement at that time.” The court suppressed the statements. P appealed.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co