In prosecution on bank robbery charge, Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s motion to suppress his confession, where said confession came after extended period of time in solitary confinement, and where defendant claimed that his prolonged solitary confinement rendered him incapable of exercising voluntary and knowing waiver of his 5th Amendment rights. Record showed that: (1) police officials came to prison where defendant was housed; (2) police read defendant his Miranda rights and defendant orally agreed to speak to police officials; (3) defendant agreed in writing to be questioned without attorney being present; (4) defendant confessed to bank robbery after being shown DNA report and picture of dyed money; and (5) defendant consented to DNA cheek swab, which matched DNA found on glove at crime scene. While defendant’s expert stated that defendant was not competent to waive his Miranda rights, three others who were present at time defendant gave confession stated that defendant was competent to waive his Miranda rights. Moreover, defendant had failed to present evidence that govt. obtained his confession through coercion, and record otherwise contained sufficient evidence to sustain his conviction without use of confession.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Criminal Court
Confession