In this month’s column, we discuss a criminal matter in which the Court of Appeals ruled that a confession obtained as a result of police deception of the defendant was inadmissible. We also address two insurance cases, one of which represents a rare reversal by the court on reargument of a decision that it rendered last year.
Confessions
People v. Thomas presented two significant issues that have received the continued attention of the criminal bar: (1) the inducement of involuntary confessions or admissions from criminal suspects by deceptive interrogation techniques used by law enforcement, and (2) the range of admissible expert testimony in a criminal case concerning the voluntariness of false confessions or admissions impacted by interrogation techniques. Because the court unanimously found, in an opinion by Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman, that Adrian Thomas’ confession should not have been received in evidence, the second issue was never reached. Thomas was convicted at trial of second degree depraved indifference murder of his son and sentenced to 25 years to life.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
