The following excerpt is from Tobias v. Arteaga, 996 F.3d 571 (9th Cir. 2020):
It was established at the time of Tobias's interrogation that "[a] coercive interrogation exists when the totality of the circumstances shows that the officer's tactics undermined the suspect's ability to exercise his free will," rendering his statements involuntary. Cunningham v. City of Wenatchee , 345 F.3d 802, 810 (9th Cir. 2003). In determining whether a statement was involuntary, "[c]ourts ... often consider the following factors: the youth of the accused, his intelligence, the lack of any advice to the accused of his constitutional rights, the length of detention, the repeated and prolonged nature of the questioning, and the use of physical punishment such as the deprivation of food or sleep." United States v. Haswood , 350 F.3d 1024, 1027 (9th Cir. 2003). Any suggestion by a law enforcement officer "that a suspect's exercise of the right to remain silent may result in harsher treatment by a court or prosecutor" is unconstitutionally coercive. United States v. Harrison , 34 F.3d 886, 89192 (9th Cir. 1994).
[996 F.3d 582]
1.
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.