Garrity V. New Jersey 1967

Improved Essays
Synopsis: Garrity v. New Jersey (1967) was the result of an investigation into alleged “ticket fixing”. The case initially involved five police officers and one civilian employee from different boroughs of New Jersey who were suspected of alleged “ticket fixing” and diverting funds to other programs. The state Attorney General ordered an investigation into the allegations and the five officers were convicted of conspiracy to obstruct the administration of the traffic laws. They appealed the court’s decision to the New Jersey State Supreme Court, which upheld the conviction. They then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court citing that they were coerced and their statements were not given voluntarily due to the threat of losing their positions.
Facts of the case: Before being questioned about the allegations, each employee was advised of the following:
1. Anything he said could be used in a state criminal proceeding against him;
2. they had the privilege to refuse to answer if the disclosure would tend to incriminate; but
3. that if he refused to answer, he would be subject to removal from office (Garrity v. New Jersey (1967). The officers answered the questions put before them. Over their objections, some of their answers were used against them in a conspiracy to obstruct the administration of the traffic laws case in which they were found guilty. Their convictions were not overturned during their appeals of being coerced because if they refused to answer the questions they could lose their positions with the police department, thus making the statements involuntary (Garrity v. New Jersey (1967). The New Jersey Supreme Court upheld the convictions based on a New Jersey forfeiture of office statute that in part states, "Any person holding or who has held any elective or appointive public office, position or employment (whether state, county or municipal), who refuses to testify upon matters relating to the office… shall, if holding elective or public office, position or employment, be removed therefrom or shall thereby forfeit his office, position or employment and any vested or future right of tenure” (Footnote 1 Garrity v. New Jersey (1967). The officers appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court to decide the constitutionality of the New Jersey forfeiture of office statute and if they were denied the protection of the Fourteenth Amendment of self-incrimination and the statements being involuntary, and therefore inadmissible in criminal proceedings. The court had to weigh the following aspects of this case: 1. The choice given petitioners either to forfeit their jobs or to incriminate themselves constituted coercion; 2. Where the choice is "between the rock and the whirlpool" (Frost Trucking Co. v. Railroad Comm'r, 271 U. S. 583, 271 U. S. 593), the decision to "waive" one or the other is made under duress. Conclusion: The
…show more content…
The option to lose their means of livelihood or to pay the penalty of self-incrimination is the antithesis of free choice to speak out or to remain silent. That practice, like interrogation practices we reviewed in Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436, 384 U. S. 464-465, is "likely to exert such pressure upon an individual as to disable him from making a free and rational choice." “We think the statements were infected by the coercion inherent in this scheme of questioning, and cannot be sustained as voluntary under our prior decisions” (Garrity v. New Jersey, (1967) pp 385 U. S.

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Agurs, the Supreme Court had expanded the rule by recognizing a duty to disclose exculpatory information even in the absence of a specific request for it, and the prosecutor failed to disclose this information that violated the defendants due process clause. In this case the female defendant testified self-defense with the stabling of her male acquaintance in a hotel room. She was then convicted of second degree murder. After the conviction of her trail the defendant had learned that the prosecutor failed to disclose this information at the trial of the victim (male acquaintance) having guilty pleas to assault and weapons possession charges. The prosecution failed to mention to the court and jury of the victims’ previous criminal background in the trial (Judge,…

    • 739 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    While the Fourteenth Amendment establishes due process and equal protection of the law. The Garrity Rights begin in New Jersey when two law enforcement officers were being investigated. These two officers were given the choice to either incriminate themselves or to loss their jobs under a statute on the grounds of self-incrimination. The confessions of the officers were taken; however, their confession was not voluntary, but coerced as they were under the impression that they would lose their jobs if they did not cooperate with the internal investigation. The purpose of this case study is to determine whether these officers’ Fifth and Fourteenth…

    • 906 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Plessy v. Ferguson supreme court case is one of the most well known landmark supreme court cases. It primarily argues the “separate but equal” segregation and Jim Crow laws that emerged post-civil war. The outcome of this case was entirely justified, at the time, because it still met the principles in the thirteen and fourteen amendments. Additionally, Plessy's argument was still undermined with the fact that the state was still keeping facilities “separate but equal.”…

    • 556 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In a 5-4 decision the U.S. Supreme Court requires criminal suspects to invoke their right to remain silent with a statement. If a suspect remains silent or won't cooperate during a interrogation session, this is no longer enough to stop any further questioning by law enforcement officials. Warden vs Thompkins is a case that shows “how the provisions of Miranda have been chiped away at” Warden vs Thompkins involved the case of Van Chester Thompkins, who was arrested and charged with first-degree murder. Thompkins was read his Miranda rights, and given an form that he wouldn't sign. After remaining silent for three hours, an officer asked, "Do you believe in God?" and "Do you pray to God to forgive you for shooting that boy down Thompkins answered…

    • 276 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Mcculloch V. Maryland

    • 170 Words
    • 1 Pages

    The McCulloch v Maryland case, presided over by John Marshall, dealt with the legality of the State of Maryland’s decision to place taxes on bank notes chartered from outside of the area. The issue was brought to the national level after James McCulloch, leader of the Second National Bank of the United States within Baltimore, refused to pay the imposed fee. The Supreme Court ultimately sided in his favor, citing the fact that the state had ratified the Constitution and then, the Necessary and Proper Clause. Likewise, Congress possesses powers that are not specifically defined within the supreme law of the land, therefore it is up to the discretion of the Judicial Branch to decide whether or not the intent is reasonable. In this case, they…

    • 170 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Mcculloch V. Maryland

    • 500 Words
    • 2 Pages

    One of the most intellectual forces of the Marshall Court was its importance on the Supreme Court's power in Marbury v. Madison. Preceding to the Marshall Court, organizers of the Constitution, For example, Alexander Hamilton inquired the Supreme Court part as the lowest part of the major branch of government. The Marshall Court changed this knowledge in Marbury v. Madison. The case's crucial issue was whether the court had the power to support a constitutional check on the case.…

    • 500 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Lochner V. New York 1905

    • 878 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Lochernzing is defined as a method to strike down economic legislation under the guise of enforcing the Due Process Clause, and it has been used by the Supreme Court even before it received its name. The term Lochnerizing come from the decision of the case Lochner v. New York 1905, when the Court decided to strike down New York’s sixty-hour limit for work based off of the right to have “freedom of contract”. This is right was said by the Court to have been implicitly implied by the 14th amendment. With this decision the Supreme Court overturned almost 200 Federal Court decisions in regards to economic legislation. However, the term has now been extended, to mean any instance in which the members of the Court come to their decisions on the constitutionality of legislation, without any Constitutional backing.…

    • 878 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Arizona (1966). This decision, generally speaking, defined the rights of the accused after an appeal was made on behalf of Ernesto Miranda. It said, among other things, that each person accused of a crime has the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney (Document 7). The tradition of these Miranda rights has become common knowledge in American society, despite the fact that some people believe that they are generally too lenient and often hamper the justice system’s ability to convict guilty criminals of their crimes (Documents 5a & 5b). The Supreme Court has failed to see adequate need for reversal of this decision, despite the dramatic odds that lie in favour of the accused as a result of the decision, and the fact that the victim is often left without help when the offender is not convicted.…

    • 832 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Plea Bargain Advantages

    • 2557 Words
    • 11 Pages

    People who have power in a situation can do what is right, or they can abuse their power. Another area of weakness that must be recognized is involuntary or coerced confessions. According to Garrett (2016) “A confession in an interrogation room, in contrast, involves extrajudicial admissions of guilt, which could be coerced or false, and, if found involuntary or to have been given in violation of constitutional requirements, may be suppressed from trial” (p. 4).…

    • 2557 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Miranda warning that arose from the U.S. Supreme Court's Miranda v. Arizona decision assures that officers assure that those arrested are aware of their rights that protect against self-incrimination prior to any questioning. The ruling in Miranda does fulfill the legal tradition of the promise against self-incrimination and protects against the pressures of authority. The Miranda rights fulfills the legal tradition of the promise against self-incrimination because they protect against wrongful punishment and torture employed by authorities. Authorities can abuse their power in order to gain info or prove their suspicions correct.…

    • 799 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    A well-educated clerk by the name of Joseph Goldberg from a town in the Ukraine decided to seek refuge from an anti-Semitic homeland. Seeking a life in the New World Joseph embarked on a journey through Alaska, and California, finally landing in Texas in 1890. Later, continuing his journey, Joseph finally arrived in Chicago where his youngest child of eleven was born with the name of Arthur Joseph Goldberg. Arthur was only eight years old when his father passed away. Destined to graduate, Arthur worked multiple different low-paying jobs while attending High School.…

    • 1608 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Interrogation is interviewing as commonly employed by law enforcement officers, military personnel, and intelligence agencies with the goal of eliciting useful information. Interrogation may involve a diverse array of techniques, ranging from developing a rapport with the subject to outright torture (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.. The Reid Model approach relies on decreasing the suspect’s perception of the consequences of confession. The interrogator uses rationalization to help the offender avoid full responsibility and projection to distort the account of what really happened. The Decision Making Model is a hedonistic calculation by the perpetrator on the options available and the consequences of choosing. In this…

    • 131 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Fifth Amendment

    • 857 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Arizona, which ruled that the inculpatory and exculpatory evidence brought against a defendant at trial is only admissible if the defendant has been informed of his right against self-incrimination as well as his right to consult with an attorney. This Supreme Court decision was brought about by the conviction of Ernesto Miranda, who provided a confession to police without being informed of his right to counsel and his right to remain silent. The Arizona State Supreme Court upheld the conviction, but the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that because he had not been informed of his rights, his rights had not been properly upheld. The key to this decision is the distinction between an informed waiving of those rights, and an uninformed waiving of those rights. If a person is convicted based on self-incrimination, the prosecution must be able to prove that they were explicitly aware of and subsequently waived their rights.…

    • 857 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The People vs. Larry Flynt Americans value their freedom, most especially their freedom of speech and how their Constitution protects such freedom. Speeches like hate speech, speech plus, symbolic speech, seditious speech and the like are part of their freedom of speech. For the purposes of this paper, the film to be discussed is The People vs. Larry Flynt. This paper will also discuss the interrelationship between media, identities, and politics depicted in the said movie. Brief Summary of the Film…

    • 1543 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Importance Of Duty Of Care

    • 4284 Words
    • 18 Pages

    Employers have what is termed ‘ a Duty of Care ‘ to employees. This means Employers must ensure all reasonable steps are taken to ensure that the employees health, safety and well being are protected. In real terms employers are bound by health and safety and employment law, together with common law duty of care. For an employer to ensure the physical and mental well-being of it’s employees, it should not be seen simply as a legal obligation but more as sound business sense; for this consideration from an employer builds trust and so increases productivity, staff retention and employee engagement. The main considerations for an employer under Duty of Care are: *…

    • 4284 Words
    • 18 Pages
    Great Essays