College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository Supreme Court Preview Conferences, Events, and Lectures 2002 Section 8: Criminal Law & Procedure Institute of Bill of Rights Law at the William & Mary Law School Repository Citation Institute of Bill of Rights Law at the William & Mary Law School, "Section 8: Criminal Law & Procedure" (2002). Supreme Court Preview. 151. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/preview/151 Copyright c 2002 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/preview CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE In This Section: New Case: 01-1444 Clzz 'u Martinez Synopsis and Question Presented 482 Justias Take Up Pdix Interution Cze Law The Supwr Cart Wi/I Comider Wedther an Oxamrd Oficer Had the Right to Passurea Badly IlrjudManfor a Statenrnt David G. Savage and Tracy Wilson 487 New Case: 01-1231 CorntiutDept ofPublic Safety u Doe Synopsis and Question Presented 489 New Case: 01-729 Godpfyv Doe Synopsis and Question Presented 497 Megan's Laws to Und Scutiny Joan Biskupic 504 States Pushfor Sex Cfender La s toApply Retnactidy Joan Biskupic 506 Sloppy Megan's Laws'Hinder Gad of BoastingPublic Safety USA Today 508 States Seanhfor Fairness in Inpknenting Megan's Law Dale Russakoff 510 Clinton Sigm Se CjenderLaw Lawrence L. Knutson 513 WitrunA prous Stingnt Restictions on Sex Gininals Joseph F. Sullivan 515 New Case: 01-9094 Alur'Rabrunv Bell Synopsis and Question Presented 518 Befow the High Court A blur'RahnunCase Cogld Clari Issue ofEffectiw Co4de for Poor Defendants The Knoxville News-Sentinel 525 480 L e of Videne, A buse Set toE nd Early Wedday Amber McDowell 526 A bu-A i's Date with Death Glaed 'Utter Failure'ofE ntire Stem David Waters 529 The ChangingDeLate Owr the Death Penalty Stuart Banner 530 Shouddn't We, the People, Be HeardMore Often by This High Cwt? Akhil Reed Amar 532 Judge Says Execitimon Vidate Costitution Charles Lane 535 New Case: 01-1184 Unitd States aRcio Synopsis and Question Presented 537 CartAsked To Define Linits ofCompiracy Michael Kirkland 542 Cawt to Hear Case Imdzing Dmug Snmiling and Terrnism Gina Holland 544 481 01-1444 Chavez v. Martinez Ruling Below: (Martinez v. City of Oxnard, 9 ,h Cir. 270 F.3d 852, 2001 U.S. App. Lexis 23401, 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Service 9265, 2001 DailyJournal DAR 11637) The court held that a reasonable police officer in a situation where the officer interviewed a wounded suspect during medical treatment without reading Miranda warnings could not believe that the interrogation of the suspect would comport with the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, thus qual-ified immunity was not available to that officer. Question Presented: Whether a police officer who conducts a coercive, custodial interrogation of a suspect who is being treated for life-threatening, police-inflicted gunshot wounds may invoke qualified immunity in a civil suit for damages under 42 U.S.C. 5 1983 (2001)? Oliverio MARTINEZ, Plaintiff-Appellee V. CITY OF OXNARD; Oxnard Police Department; Art Lopez, Chief; Maria Pena; Andrew Salinas; Ron Zavala, Defendants, and Ben CHAVEZ, Defendant-Appellant United States Court of Appeals For the Ninth Circuit Decided October 30, 2001 TALLMAN, Circuit Judge: traversed the lot. Officer Salinas ordered the rider, Oliverio Martinez, to stop, We must determine whether a police dismount, spread his legs, and place his officer who conducts a coercive, custodial hands behind his head. Martinez interrogation of a suspect who is being complied. treated for life-threatening, police-inflicted During a protective pat-down frisk, gunshot wounds may invoke qualified Officer Salinas discovered a knife in Mr. immunity in a civil suit for damages under Martinez's waistband. Officer Salinas 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2001). Under the alerted his partner and pulled Martinez's circumstances of this case, we hold he hand from behind his head to apply may not. handcuffs. Officer Salinas claims that Martinez pulled away from him. Martinez I alleges that he offered no resistance. Either way, Officer Salinas tackled On November 28, 1997, police officers Martinez and a struggle ensued. Maria Pena and Andrew Salinas were investigating narcotics activity near a Both officers testified that during the vacant lot in a residential area of Oxnard, struggle Martinez did not attempt to hit or California. While questioning one kick them; Officer Salinas struck the only individual, they heard a bicycle blow. The officers maintain that Martinez approaching on the darkened path that drew Officer Salinas's gun and pointed it 482 at them. Martinez alleges that Officer pam, was choking, could not move his Salinas began to draw his gun and that legs, and was dying. He drifted in and out Martinez grabbed Officer Salinas's hand of consciousness. By the district court's to prevent him from doing so. tally, "during the questioning at the hospital, [Martinez] repeatedly begged for All parties agree that Officer Salinas cried treatment; he told [Sergeant Chavez] he out, "He's got my gun." Officer Pena believed he was dying eight times; drew her weapon and fired several times. complained that he was in extreme pami One bullet struck Martinez in the face, on fourteen separate occasions; and twice damaging his optic nerve and rendering said he did not want to talk any more." him blind. Another bullet fractured a Chavez stopped only when medical vertebrae, paralyzing his legs. Three more personnel moved Martinez out of the bullets tore through his leg around the emergency room to perform a C.A.T. knee joint. The officers then handcuffed scan. Martinez. Martinez filed a complaint under 42 The patrol supervisor, Sergeant Ben U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that the officer Chavez, arrived on the scene minutes later defendants violated his constitutional along with paramedics. While Sergeant rights by stopping him without probable Chavez discussed the incident with cause, using excessive force, and Officer Salinas, the paramedics removed subjecting him to a coercive interrogation the handcuffs so they could stabilize while he was receiving medical care. He Martinez's neck and back and loaded him moved for summary judgment on each of into the ambulance. Sergeant Chavez rode his claims. The district court denied to the emergency room in the ambulance Sergeant Chavez's defense of qualified with Martinez to obtain his version of immunity and granted summary judgment what had happened. for Martinez on his claim that Chavez violated his Fifth and Fourteenth As emergency room personnel treated Amendment rights by coercing statements Martinez, Sergeant Chavez began a taped from him during medical treatment.! In interview. Chavez did not preface his this interlocutory appeal, Chavez argues questions by reciting Miranda warnings. that the district court erred by holding The interview lasted 45 minutes. The that he was not entitled to qualified medical staff asked Chavez to leave the unmunity. trauma room several times, but the tape shows that he returned and resumed II questioning. Chavez turned off the tape recorder each time medical personnel We have jurisdiction over Sergeant removed him from the room. The Chavez's interlocutory appeal of the transcript of the recorded conversation purely legal question whether he is entitled totals about ten minutes and provides an to qualified immunity. Mitchell v. Forsyth, incontrovertible account of the interview. 472 U.S. 511, 528, 86 L. Ed. 2d 411, 105 S. Ct. 2806 (1985). We review de novo the Sergeant Chavez pressed Martinez with persistent, directed questions regarding The district court denied summary judgment on the events leading up to the shooting. Martinez's claims that he was Improperly stopped Most of Martinez's answers were non- by the police and that they used excessive force responsive. He complained that he was in against him. Those claims will be tried to a jury. 483 district court's determination on summary interrogation while he received treatment judgment that Chavez cannot invoke for life-threatening gunshot wounds qualified immunity as a bar to civil inflicted by other police officers. litigation. Robinson v. Prunty, 249 F.3d In Brown v. Mississippi, 297 U.S. 278, 862, 865-66 (9th Cir. 2001). For the 286, 80 L. Ed. 682, 56 S. Ct. 461 (1936), a purposes of this interlocutory appeal, we unanimous Supreme Court condemned must accept as true the facts alleged by police officers' use of violence to coerce Martinez and determine whether Chavez confessions from criminal suspects as is nonetheless entitled to qualified "revolting to the sense of justice" immunity as a matter of law. Id. at 866. embodied in the Constitution. Although the coercive tactics employed by the Section 1983 permits an individual whose police in Brown involved physical federal constitutional or statutory rights violence, the Court clarified in subsequent have been violated by a public official opinions that the Fifth and Fourteenth acting under color of state law to sue the Amendments also proscribe more subtle official for damages. Public officials are forms of police coercion. [Citations afforded protection, however, "from omitted] undue interference with their duties and from potentially disabling threats of Chief Justice Warren observed in liability." Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. Blackburn v. Alabama, 361 U.S. 199, 206, 800, 806, 73 L. Ed. 2d 396, 102 S. Ct. 4 L. Ed. 2d 242, 80 S. Ct. 274 (1960), that 2727 (1982). Qualified immunity shields "coercion can be mental as well as them "from liability for civil damages physical, and .. the blood of the accused insofar as their conduct does not violate is not the only hallmark of an clearly established statutory or unconstitutional inquisition." A police constitutional rights of which a reasonable officer's extraction of a confession is person would have known." Id.