Sunteți pe pagina 1din 5

Acquiring Admissible Statements Worksheet 1

CJA/363 Version 3

University of Phoenix Material


Acquiring Admissible Statements Worksheet
Conduct an Internet search by visiting the Arizona, Illinois, New York, and California state
websites. Locate the legal requirements needed to acquire admissible statements in these
particular states. Complete the worksheet below with your findings.

State Legal Precedent Other


Requirements
Arizona
If Recently decided, by the Arizona Court of Sources regarding th
voluntarily Appeals, in the case Arizona v. Londo,
given, a while an officer conducted a non- Public Agency T
confession mirandized interrogation on a drug http://www.patc.com
is suspect, the statement was, under the escue-doctrine.shtm
admissible “rescue doctrine”, admissible as evidence
in evidence in this case. Reason why is because during
in any an undercover drug sting, shortly after Arizona Revised Stat
criminal Londo was arrested for selling
prosecution crack/cocaine, He began to vomit and Title 13 Criminal Co
. Prior to show other signs of a medical emergency. 1416 Admissibilit
the Therefore, a detective at the scene statement Notice
confession believed that Londo may have swallowed
being some narcotic’s based off the symptoms
allowed he was showing. When asked from the
admissible detective if he (Londo)had done so, Londo
in admitted that he had, and the detective
evidence, immediately called 911 for an emergency
the judge medical response team to come to the
will take a scene.
closer look
at the
confession
to
determine
whether or
not the
confession
was
voluntarily,
and inform
the jury on
the trial of
the
confession.
If the
confession
Acquiring Admissible Statements Worksheet 2
CJA/363 Version 3

is then
proven to
be
voluntary,
the judge
will permit
it as
evidence
and permit
the jury to
hear all
evidences
and rules
regarding
confessions
as evidence
and
admissible
statements.
Illinois
During an Sec. 115-10.1. Sec. 115-10.2. Adm
interview statements when w
or Admissibility of Prior Inconsistent testify despite a
interrogat Statements. testify.
ion, if a
confessio In all criminal cases, evidence of a
n or statement made by a witness is not Illinois Criminal S
statement made inadmissible by the “hearsay Admissibility of Evi
is made rule” if (a) the statement is lacking from
from the consistency with his or her testimony www.law.onecle.com
defendant at the hearing or trial, and (b) the ndexVIII.html
, or any witness is subject to cross-
other examination regarding the
form of statement, and (c) the statement (1)
evidence was made under oath at a trial,
is brought hearing, or other proceeding, or (2)
out recites, describes, or explains an
during, event or condition of which the
the witness had personal knowledge, and
evidence (A) the statement is verified to have
can only been written or signed by the
be witness, or (B) the witness
admissibl acknowledged under oath the making
e in court of the statement either in his or her
if the testimony at the hearing or trial in
court is which the admission into evidence of
considerin the prior statement is being pursued,
g the or at a trial, hearing, or other
burden of proceeding, or (C) the statement is
Acquiring Admissible Statements Worksheet 3
CJA/363 Version 3

pre-trial proved to have been accurately


or post- recorded by a tape recorder,
trial videotape recording, or any other
circumsta similar electronic means of sound
nces for recording
bail, or
when Illinois Criminal Statutes. (2010).
deliberati Admissibility of Evidence. Retrieved
ng a prior froof m
release www.law.onecle.com/Illinois/735ilcs/i
order. ndexVIII.html
New
York For New York v. Harris- www.findlaw.com
statement
s or Court of Appeals New York- In this
confessio case, police officers had probable
ns to be cause to believe that Harris had
admissibl committed murder, so therefore
e in court, entered his home without obtaining a
a written warrant first, and read Harris his
or oral Miranda rights. The officers reported
statement that Harris had confessed to
must be committing murder. Harris was then
made arrested and taken to jail where he
from the was again read his Miranda rights,
defendant followed by signing a written
, stating inculpatory statement, which is a
what his written statement of putting blame
or her on oneself.
involveme
nt or lack
of Because the Fourth amendment
involveme states that a warrant must be
nt is obtained in order to enter a suspect’s
regarding home, the New York court
the case. suppressed the first statement made
Unless the Harris. However, Harris’s second
statement statement was admitted as evidence
was in court and Harris was convicted of
voluntaril second-degree murder. Shortly after,
y made, the State of Appeals reversed the
the conviction and decided that the
evidence evidence was inadmissible in court
cannot be because the second statement and
used in the connection with the arrest was
court. The not sufficiently attenuated in regards
defendant to the fruits of an illegal search.
shall not
me
Acquiring Admissible Statements Worksheet 4
CJA/363 Version 3

threatene
d for his
or her
confessio
n by any
means, if
so, the
evidence
cannot be
used in
court.
Californ
ia For According to the Supreme Court Hagan, P.J. (2000,
statement there are advantages to the general Retrieved
s and acceptance standard. It allows those http://www.findartic
confessio who are most qualified to use the
n to be validity of a method to determine
admissibl that uniform decisions and protection www.caselaw.com
e in court, of those involved were established.
a few
things
must
occur
first; the
method
being
used to
acquire
the
statement
must be
establishe
d by an
expert
testimony
, and that
the
correct
scientific
measures
were used
to obtain
the
evidence.

In one to three paragraphs, answer the questions below regarding the


regulatory information you found while conducting your research.
Acquiring Admissible Statements Worksheet 5
CJA/363 Version 3

1. When reviewing the legal requirements to acquire an admissible


statement, what similarities did you find among the four states?
There were several similarities among the four states regarding the
requirements to an admissible statement. California seemed to be a little
more specific concerning the requirements. Most of the states permitted a
statement from a witness to be used during the court proceeding’s but at
times had problems getting the approval of the statements to be used in
court.

2. What differences did you find among the four states?


For the most part, the state’s legal requirements for a statement to be
admissible in court are very similar. However, one difference can been seen
for the state of Illinois, which statements are only admissible in a pre-trial, as
well as California having more strict guidelines.

3. What do you consider the most interesting concept regarding your


comparison of admissible statements for these states?
The most interesting concept of admissible statements between the states
listed was how the State of Arizona seems to offer more of a flexibility for
officers to gain admissible statements. It is interesting how statements
can be obtained while officers are undercover as either a drug dealer or a
buyer. With the same situation as the case of Arizona v. Londo, the
statement made by Londo would most likely be inadmissible in court with
the other states because Londo’s statement was not entirely “voluntarily”.

S-ar putea să vă placă și