People v. Cipriano

In People v. Cipriano, 431 Mich 315, 333-334; 429 NW2d 781 (1988), the Supreme Court of Michigan stated the following regarding determinations of voluntariness: In accordance with the approach taken by the federal courts and a majority of the states, we believe "unnecessary delay" in arraignment is only one of the factors that should be considered in evaluating the voluntariness of a confession. The test of voluntariness should be whether, considering the totality of all the surrounding circumstances, the confession is "the product of an essentially free and unconstrained choice by its maker," or whether the accused's "will has been overborne and his capacity for self-determination critically impaired. . . ." Culombe v. Connecticut, 367 U.S. 568, 602; 81 S Ct 1860; 6 L Ed 2d 1037 (1961). The line of demarcation "is that at which governing self-direction is lost and compulsion, of whatever nature or however infused, propels or helps to propel the confession." Id. In determining whether a statement is voluntary, the trial court should consider, among other things, the following factors: the age of the accused; his lack of education or his intelligence level; the extent of his previous experience with the police; the repeated and prolonged nature of the questioning; the length of the detention of the accused before he gave the statement in question; the lack of any advice to the accused of his constitutional rights; whether there was an unnecessary delay in bringing him before a magistrate before he gave the confession; whether the accused was injured, intoxicated or drugged, or in ill health when he gave the statement; whether the accused was deprived of food, sleep, or medical attention; whether the accused was physically abused; and whether the suspect was threatened with abuse. See Culombe, supra, 367 U.S. at 602; United States ex rel Mattox v. Scott, 372 F Supp 304, 309-310 (ND Ill, 1974), aff'd in part and rev'd in part 507 F2d 919 (CA 7, 1974). See also Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 93 S Ct 2041, 36 L Ed 2d 854 (1973). The Supreme Court of Michigan set forth the following factors that a trial court should consider in determining whether a statement is voluntary: The age of the accused; his lack of education or his intelligence level; the extent of his previous experience with the police; the repeated and prolonged nature of the questioning; the length of the detention of the accused before he gave the statement in question; the lack of any advice to the accused of his constitutional rights; whether there was an unnecessary delay in bringing him before a magistrate before he gave the confession; whether the accused was injured, intoxicated or drugged, or in ill health when he gave the statement; whether the accused was deprived of food, sleep, or medical attention; whether the accused was physically abused; and whether the suspect was threatened with abuse. . . . The absence or presence of any one of these factors is not necessarily conclusive on the issue of voluntariness. The ultimate test of admissibility is whether the totality of the circumstances surrounding the making of the confession indicates that it was freely and voluntarily made.