State v. Monaco

ORS 136.425(1) provides that ‘[a] confession or admission of a defendant, whether in the course of judicial proceedings or otherwise, cannot be given in evidence against the defendant when it was made under the influence of fear produced by threats.’

Defendant is appealing denial of his motion to suppress. Defendant asserts the court erred in denying his motion to suppress incrimination statements made during his interrogation. Defendant argues that the statements he made while being interrogated were not voluntary because the detectives had induced him to confess. The state responded that the statements made were voluntary and that detectives can use mere adjurations are permissible. ORS 136.425(1) provides that ‘[a] confession or admission of a defendant, whether in the course of judicial proceedings or otherwise, cannot be given in evidence against the defendant when it was made under the influence of fear produced by threats. The Court held that the trial court was correct in denying the motion to suppress. The Court reasoned at no point during the interrogation did the detectives imply that by confessing the defendant could avoid prosecution, or would assist him in getting leniency. The Court further reasoned that the totality of the circumstances showed that the statements made were voluntary. Affirmed.