The Connecticut Supreme Court has clarified the standard it uses to evaluate the voluntariness of confessions made in police custody, but that's of little comfort to convicted murderer James Pinder. But a state supreme court justice finds state police did not violate Pinder's constitutional rights when they obtained inculpatory statements from him during a 1994 polygraph examination. The unit, Riccio contends, is "improperly leaning on people to extract confessions."
September 03, 1999 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
The Connecticut Supreme Court has clarified the standard it uses to evaluate the voluntariness of confessions made in police custody, but that’s of little comfort to convicted murderer James Pinder.
Justice Flemming L. Norcott Jr., writing for the majority in State v. Pinder, spells out the previously murky standard. But Norcott finds state police did not violate Pinder’s constitutional rights when they obtained inculpatory statements from him during a 1994 polygraph examination.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
