holding that a motion to suppress an involuntary confession “must be made in advance of trial”
How later courts described this case
- holding that a motion to suppress an involuntary confession “must be made in advance of trial”
- “The longer the delay, the greater the probability that the confession will be held involuntary. At some point, a delay will become so long that it alone is enough to make a confession involuntary”
- “If the defendant does not waive preliminary examination, each party may subpoena witnesses, offer proofs, and examine and cross-examine witnesses.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Kelly, J.
(concurring in result). I agree with the majority that the trial court erred in suppressing *646 defendant’s inculpatory statement solely on the basis of the delay and that the court should have, instead, considered the voluntariness of the statement on the basis of the totality of the circumstances under People v Cipriano, 431 Mich 315, 334 ; 429 NW2d 781 (1988). However, to the extent that the majority attempts to evaluate the voluntariness of the statement in light of the record presented to us, I disagree with that approach. The statement must first be properly evaluated by the trial court. That was not done in this case. Therefore, because the trial court has not yet done so, this Court should not be attempting to evaluate the voluntariness of the statement. We simply do not have all the necessary information to do so. However, because I believe that we must reverse and remand to the trial court to make appropriate findings under the factors established in Cipriano , I concur in the result.