Competence to Confess

AbstractConfessional evidence typically is highly persuasive in criminal trials, especially when it is the primary source of evidence offered by the prosecution. Prior to obtaining a confession from a suspect, police investigators are obliged to provide aMirandawarning if they anticipate the confession will be introduced into evidence at a criminal trial. We describe the origins of theMirandawarning, perspectives on its utility and relevance, and how the warning has changed over time. Recent developments in constitutional law relevant to theMirandawarning and relevant to judicial determinations of the credibility of confessions are summarized. We review historical and recent case law relevant to “coerced” confessions and the credibility or trustworthiness of confessions. We describe changes over time in judicial interpretations of what constitutes coercion and credibility, issues with special populations, and the recent focus in case law on individual factors that might impairMirandacomprehension or that might impair a suspect's capacity to provide a credible or reliable confession. Empirical research on factors associated with impairments inMirandacomprehension and impairments related to the tendency in some individuals to provide false confessions is considered. Case law rulings and empirical research are integrated into suggested practices for the forensic assessment of abilities related toMirandacomprehension and the trustworthiness of confessions.