United States v. Boykin
| Decision Date | 15 July 1968 |
| Docket Number | No. 17102.,17102. |
| Citation | 398 F.2d 483 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America v. Jackie Benny BOYKIN a/k/a Benny Jackie Boykin, Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit |
Richard C. Brittain, Danville, Pa., for appellant.
Harry A. Nagle, Asst. U. S. Atty., Lewisburg, Pa., (Bernard J. Brown, U. S. Atty., Scranton, Pa., on the brief), for appellee.
Before HASTIE, Chief Judge, STALEY and SEITZ, Circuit Judges.
The defendant was convicted by a jury on February 1, 1967, of an assault upon a fellow prisoner in violation of 18 U.S. C.A. § 113(c). The only issue raised on appeal is that a pre-trial statement made by the defendant to FBI agents was involuntarily given and was therefore admitted into evidence in violation of his constitutional rights. The district court held a full evidentiary hearing out of the jury's presence on the issue here raised. The court concluded that the defendant's statement was voluntarily made. However, it very properly did not advise the jury of its determination. Rather, it permitted the statement to go into evidence and instructed the jury, inter alia, to consider all the surrounding circumstances in aid of determining voluntariness.
The defendant's first contention is that, judged by the standards set forth in Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), there was neither a waiver of his privilege against self-incrimination nor of his right to have counsel when the statement was given. The Government recognizes that the appellant was in custody and without counsel and that it therefore had a heavy burden to demonstrate the requisite waivers. The record shows that the district court was fully cognizant of the governing constitutional principles when it decided that the statement was admissible. The Government's evidence fully warranted a finding of explicit compliance with the "advice" requirements of Miranda. The testimony also justified the conclusion that the defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his rights after having been advised thereof. For example, the agents testified that in spite of the warnings and advice given him, the defendant said, I "might as well tell you about it." We are satisfied from our own examination of the record that the district court correctly decided that the Government had carried its heavy burden of showing that the defendant waived his privilege against self-incrimination and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jones v. Kemp
...declaration of a cooperative attitude was denoted by his remark "I might as well tell you ..." (T. 491). See United States v. Boykin, 398 F.2d 483, 484 (3rd Cir.1968), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 1032, 89 S.Ct. 645, 21 L.Ed.2d 575 (1969) (defendant's statement, after being read his rights, that ......
-
United States v. Boffa
...appears to be strictly necessary to prevent outside interference. United States v. Boykin, 275 F.Supp. 16, 18 (M.D.Pa.1967), aff'd, 398 F.2d 483 (C.A.3, 1968), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 1032, 89 S.Ct. 645, 21 L.Ed.2d 575 The nature of the charges to be tried in this case are such that they alo......
-
State v. Miller, 13368
...a desire to cooperate and they indicate a desire to enter into a generalized discussion of the investigation. See: United States v. Boykin, 398 F.2d 483, 484 (3d Cir.1968), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 1032, 89 S.Ct. 645, 21 L.Ed.2d 575 (1969) [I " 'might as well tell you about it' "]; Brown v. S......
-
Padilla v. Lynch
... ... Oliver, Warden of Folsom State Penitentiary, Appellees ... No. 21924 ... United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit ... July 22, 1968.398 F.2d 482 Luis Soto ... ...
-
Table of Cases
...333 Boxley, United States v., 373 F.3d 759 (6th Cir. 2004) 257, 258 Boyd, State v., 64 P.3d 419 (Kan. 2003) 153 Boykin, United States v., 398 F.2d 483 (3d Cir. 1968) 120 Boyster, United States v., 436 F.3d 986 (8th Cir. 2006) 140 Bradford, United States v., 423 F.3d 1149 (10th Cir. 2005) 15......
-
Chapter 5. Interview and Interrogation
...v. Butler, 441 U.S. 369 (1979). Statements such as “I might as well tell you about it” may constitute a waiver. United States v. Boykin, 398 F.2d 483 (3d Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 1032 (1969). This is a tricky area. Another court ruled that a suspect’s response of “What do you want......