Criminal Defendant Accidentally Confesses to a Crime Not Aware of Tape Recording Device Inside of Police Car

The basic definition of the term "hearsay" is "an extrajudicial statement that only has evidentiary value for the truth of the matter asserted." Hearsay is typically excluded from evidentiary hearings since it's presumed to not be reliable. However, there's lots of exceptions to the general hearsay rule. An out of court statement is only considered hearsay, & thus excluded, if the nature of the declaration is testimonial. If the out of court declaration isn't testimonial, it can still be introduced into evidence.

In the matter of Bowens vs. State of Florida, the Appellate Court tackled this topic as it related to a co-defendant's recorded statements while in the rear of a police car. The police obtain information and confessions in this manner relatively frequently. 2 individuals sitting in the rear seat of a police vehicle trying to get their stories straight accidentally provide the police a confession.

The District Court of Appeal, after the defendant's appeal of a strong-armed robbery judgment and sentence, affirmed the circuit court's refusal to keep out a surreptitiously recorded conversation containing admissions by defendant in the back of a patrol vehicle, and upheld the circuit court's denial of a motion for mistrial.

After being apprehended for a strong-arm robbery, the defendant and the driver of the vehicle wherein he was a occupant, had been put in the back of a police vehicle. A concealed microphone recorded the conversation in which the defendant made admissions pertaining to the strong armed robbery. The Fourth District Court of Appeal found that the taped statements of the defendant were admissible as a party admission under The Florida Rules of Evidence, & that the statements of the co-defendant were admissible to place defendant's statements in context (making the statements non-testimonial). The District Court of Appeal additionally held that the statements were not instigated or otherwise facilitated by anybody for the primary purpose of gathering evidence for a prosecution, but were a recording of a spontaneous conversation. The Fourth District Court of Appeal ruling contains an in depth discussion of Crawford v. Washington, as well as other cases which have ruled on surreptitious tape recordings.

Comments? Questions? Email Here

© HowtoAdvice.com