Ringo V. State (1986)

The Supreme Court’s decision involved the Fourteenth Amendment along with a multitude of other cases in order to examine the totality of the circumstances. The court agreed with the Court of Appeals decision implying that a confession would aid Bond’s case and the detective promising to put Bond in contact with his family did not induce an involuntary confession. However, the detective’s statement that Bond would not receive a fair trail because of his race and the prospective jury makes the court condemn the intentional misrepresentation of judicial rights in order to convince a suspect in a criminal case to confess. In the cases of Ringo v. State (1879) they referenced the quote, “The critical injury is whether the defendant’s statements were …show more content…
(1946) that decided, “the color of a man’s skin is unrelated to his fitness as a juror.” This leads to the Batson v. Kentucky (1986) case of 1986 that “Purposeful racial discrimination in selection of the venire violates a defendant’s right to equal protection because it denies him the protection that a trial by jury is intended to secure.” This led to decision that the detective’s interrogation technique goes against those statues and prior court decisions. The court then points out the dangers of purposeful racial discrimination in the justice system and referenced the case of Powers v. Ohio, 1999 stating, “…racial discrimination has no place in the courtroom.” Then further with the case of Addison v. State (Ind. 2012) with “create a system where all citizens are equal in the eyes of the law.” The court further depicts the detective’s comment by saying that its purpose was to play on Bond’s fear of not receiving a fair trail due to his race. That the comment implied a return to the days of overt racial discrimination and overtly contradicts the work that the justice system has been implementing in order to eliminate the perception that race plays a part in access to justice. There is a connection the State v. Haynie