U.S. v. Davis
| Decision Date | 30 December 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. 75--1201,75--1201 |
| Citation | 527 F.2d 1110 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Charles Edward DAVIS, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Before BARNES and GOODWIN, Circuit Judges, and SCHNACKE, * District Judge.
Davis appeals from his conviction, on a jury verdict of guilty, of bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a).
When Davis was initially questioned by an FBI agent, he indicated he didn't want to talk. The agent showed Davis a picture of Davis at the bank in the course of the robbery and said, 'Are you sure you don't want to reconsider?' Davis studied the picture and then said, 'Well, I guess you've got me.' He then signed a waiver of all his rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), agreeing to talk without a lawyer. His subsequent confession was introduced at trial, which he now contends was reversible error.
Defendant relies on U.S. v. Barnes, 432 F.2d 89, 90--91 (9th Cir. 1970). There, after suspects indicated that they didn't want to talk, they were confronted with the confession of a confederate, and questioned about it.
There was no intervening readvice about rights and no express waiver. The admissions thus obtained were properly deemed inadmissible because they were the product of pressure, by continued questioning, to induce answers despite the desire of the defendant to remain silent.
But the right to talk or remain silent is the defendant's, and no mechanical application of Miranda should prevent the informed, voluntary, and free exercise of that right (Michigan v. Mosley, 423 U.S. 96, 96 S.Ct. 321, 46 L.Ed.2d 313 (1975)).
Here, the agent merely asked Davis if he wanted to reconsider his decision to remain silent, in view of the picture; the questioning did not resume until after Davis had voluntarily agreed that it should (See U.S. v. Jackson, 436 F.2d 39, 40--41 (9th Cir. 1970), cert. denied, 403 U.S. 906, 91 S.Ct. 2209, 29 L.Ed.2d 682 (1971)). The Government has met its heavy burden of showing that Davis's waiver of his rights to remain silent and to counsel, signed before he confessed, was made knowingly and intelligently. There is no evidence of any psychological or physical pressure on Davis, or of overreaching of any kind.
Davis next contends that it is not ascertainable from the record as a whole, as it must be, that the trial court made a full and independent determination of the voluntariness of his confession (see Javor v. U.S., 403 F.2d 507, 509 (9th Cir. 1968)). However,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Derrico
...182 (1974); Tanner v. Vincent, supra, 936-37; United States v. Lewis, 425 F.Supp. 1166, 1178 (D.Conn.1977); see United States v. Davis, 527 F.2d 1110, 1111 (9th Cir. 1975). The defendant additionally urges suppression of the confession under the sixth amendment to the United States constitu......
-
Com. v. Brant
...v. Olof, 527 F.2d 752, 753 (9th Cir. 1975); Commonwealth v. Dustin, 373 Mass. 612, 615, 368 N.E.2d 1388 (1977); United States v. Davis, 527 F.2d 1110, 1111 (9th Cir. 1976); Blackmon v. Blackledge, 396 F.Supp. 296, 298-299 (W.D.N.C.1975); United States ex rel. Doss v. Bensinger, 463 F.2d 576......
-
State v. Hartley
...Lopez-Diaz, 630 F.2d 661, 665 (9th Cir.1980).] See United States v. Smith, 608 F.2d 1011, 1013-14 (4th Cir.1979); United States v. Davis, 527 F.2d 1110, 1111 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 953, 96 S.Ct. 1729, 48 L.Ed.2d 196 (1976); United States v. Collins, 462 F.2d 792, 797 (2d Cir......
-
People v. Ferro
...been cited with approval in the afore-cited cases: United States v. Hart, 619 F.2d 325 United States v. Wilson, 571 F.2d 455 United States v. Davis, 527 F.2d 1110 cert. den. 425 U.S. 953, 96 S.Ct. 1729, 48 L.Ed.2d 196 United States v. Boston, 508 F.2d 1171 cert. den. 421 U.S. 1001, 95 S.Ct.......