Court rules for suspect in dispute over confession

Headline News

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that confessions obtained by federal authorities before a suspect's first court appearance may be inadmissible if more than six hours elapse between an arrest and a court date.


The court said in a 5-4 decision that long delays before a suspect sees a judge can give the government too much leverage over someone who has been arrested.

"Federal agents would be free to question suspects for extended periods before bringing them out in the open, and we have always known what custodial secrecy leads to," Justice David Souter wrote in the majority opinion.

The prisoner in the case, Johnnie Corley, was arrested on suspicion of robbing a credit union in Norristown, Pa. The FBI agents who arrested him did not take him to court for his initial appearance for 29 1/2 hours, during which time they elicited a confession from Corley.

Under federal law and previous court decisions, confessions obtained within six hours of an arrest are presumed to be valid and may be used at trial. The question in Corley's case was what courts should do with confessions when there is a delay before the first court appearance.

The federal appeals court in Philadelphia said Corley's admission that he robbed the bank could be used against him, ruling that the confession was voluntary despite the delay.

Related listings

  • Summary of Supreme Court actions Wednesday

    Summary of Supreme Court actions Wednesday

    Headline News 04/02/2009

    _ Ruled for employers who want to force unionized workers to pursue their age discrimination claims through arbitration instead of a federal lawsuit. The court, in a 5-4 decision, said an arbitration agreement negotiated between an employer and a uni...

  • Coleman won't rule out appeal if loses Senate case

    Coleman won't rule out appeal if loses Senate case

    Headline News 03/26/2009

    Republican Norm Coleman, trying to regain his U.S. Senate seat, visited the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday and didn't rule out an appeal if a Minnesota court rules against him in his recount battle against Democrat Al Franken. One of Minnesota's two Senate ...

  • Philadelphia law firm disbands, citing economy

    Philadelphia law firm disbands, citing economy

    Headline News 03/23/2009

    A major Philadelphia law firm founded in 1903 is disbanding, citing the economic crisis. WolfBlock LLP has more than 300 lawyers. The firm announced Monday that the partners have voted to shut down, but not immediately. They plan to keep operating fo...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC

A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party

Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party

However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.

Business News

New York & New Jersey Family Law Matters We represent our clients in all types of proceedings that include termination of parental rights. >> read