Can the Police Threaten to Take Your Truck If You Don’t Confess?

In television police dramas, there are often scenes where a detective (or an assistant district attorney) offers “leniency” in exchange for an immediate confession–or alternatively, a more harsh punishment if they do not confess. In reality, such tactics are generally considered coercion. This means that even if the suspect does confess in response to such pressure, the confession would be considered inadmissible in court as it was not “voluntary.”

Florida Appeals Court Overturns Car Theft Conviction Due to Coerced Confession

A recent decision from the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal, Vera v. State, illustrates a scenario where police officers crossed the line in obtaining a confession. This case involved the theft of a vehicle from a business. Surveillance video from the surrounding area showed there was a truck parked in the area at the time. The video did not include any footage of who was driving the truck.

Police later traced the truck’s registration to the defendant in this case. Detectives located this truck outside of a local garage. The detectives approached the truck’s owner, who was the defendant in this case. At this point, the detectives had no reason to suspect the defendant had committed any crime. Nevertheless, they advised the defendant of his Miranda rights and gave no indication that he was free to leave.

The detectives questioned the defendant for approximately 30 minutes. During this time, one of the detectives threatened to seize the defendant’s truck as a “possible suspect vehicle.” She repeated this threat three times. Despite the fact the detectives had no evidence of the defendant’s involvement in any crime, he eventually confessed. He was subsequently convicted of burglary, grand theft of a motor vehicle, and criminal mischief.

On appeal, however, the Fourth District overturned the defendant’s conviction. The appellate court held the trial judge should have thrown out the confession because it was clearly the product of police coercion. Specifically, the detectives “misrepresented” the law when they said they could seize the defendant’s truck. While it is true that the police can seize “property used in the commission of a crime,” at the time of the defendant’s interrogation, the police had no evidence of his involvement in any crime. Indeed, the only evidence used to convict the defendant at trial was his confession. And that confession came immediately after the detective repeated her earlier threat to take the defendant’s truck.

Contact AsiliA Law Firm Today

The defendant in the above case might have avoided an arrest and trial altogether if he had simply invoked his right to remain silent the moment the police started asking him questions. Remember, the police need probable cause to arrest you. Anything you say can be used–even manipulated–to generate that probable cause. Do not give them any ammunition.

Instead, if you are under suspicion of committing a crime, you should immediately contact an experienced Miami car theft attorney who can help ensure that the police do not violate your rights. Call AsiliA Law Firm today at 786-420-3014 or contact us online to schedule an initial consultation.

Source:

4dca.flcourts.gov/content/download/2441232/opinion/Opinion_2023-1311.pdf