Abstract
<p> This op-ed criticizes a recent Ohio Supreme Court case, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/0/2020/2020-Ohio-5485.pdf" target="_blank"> In re M.H. </a> , in which the Court held that the confession of a juvenile to a child protective services officer was voluntary. According to the Court's plurality opinion, a confession can be rendered involuntary only when a police officer conducts the interrogation. Thus, no matter what the child protective services investigator does during an interrogation, a resulting confession is always voluntary simply because the interrogator is not a police officer. Witmer-Rich criticizes this rule as inconsistent with fundamental principles of liberty and due process.</p>
| Original language | American English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Cleveland Plain Dealer / cleveland.com |
| State | Published - Dec 18 2020 |
Keywords
- Ohio Supreme Court
- juveniles
- coercion
- confession
- interrogation
Disciplines
- Constitutional Law
- Courts
- Juvenile Law
- Law
- State and Local Government Law
Cite this
- APA
- Standard
- Harvard
- Vancouver
- Author
- BIBTEX
- RIS