Utah Special Function Officer (SFO) Practice Exam

What did the ruling in Massiah v. US (1964) establish regarding confessions?

1. Confessions can be obtained through official trickery

2. Trickery cannot be used to obtain incriminating statements

3. Confessions must be recorded

4. Suspects need to be informed about the charges against them

The correct answer is: Trickery cannot be used to obtain incriminating statements

The ruling in Massiah v. US established that trickery, or deceptive tactics, cannot be employed by law enforcement to elicit incriminating statements from a suspect after they have been formally charged and have retained the right to counsel. The court determined that allowing such tactics would violate the suspect’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel and the fairness required in the judicial process. This case emphasized that once a defendant has been indicted and has engaged an attorney, any confession obtained through deceptive practices would not be admissible in court. This serves to protect individuals from coercive interrogation techniques that could lead to false confessions or unreliable evidence, reinforcing the integrity of the legal process and the right to fair representation. While options relating to the use of trickery could imply other contexts in legal proceedings, the ruling specifically focuses on the inadmissibility of confessions obtained in violation of the defendant's rights as established in the Sixth Amendment.