An imprisoned man’s Fifth Amendment rights weren’t violated when he was denied parole for refusing to admit to sexually assaulting his daughter as part of a state-required treatment program, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has ruled.

Weighing in on an issue that has split the circuit courts, the court laid out a three-point test to determine whether a consequence faced by a prisoner who chooses not to incriminate himself rises “to the level of compulsion necessary to violate the Fifth Amendment,” according to the court’s April 4 decision in Roman v. DiGuglielmo.

This content has been archived.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 Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

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]