This Note examines the Supreme Court’s decision in Corley, comparing the reasoning for the decision with the reasoning for the opposite conclusion, adopted by the dissent and many circuits. Part II provides the background of the McNabb-Mallory decision, Congress’ response and intent in 18 U.S.C. § 3501, and how section 3501 has been interpreted by the lower federal courts. Part III argues for the adoption of the dissent’s view by examining various reasons compelling its conclusion. These include the legislative intent of section 3501, the negative implications created by the holding in Corley, and policy reasons that favor the dissent’s view. Part IV concludes by advocating that Congress intended to completely abrogate the McNabb- Mallory rule, thereby restoring a complete voluntariness test to restore judicial discretion and eliminate acquittals based on technicalities.
Christopher M. Reid,
Voluntary Confessions: An Examination of the Need to Restore a Pure Voluntary Confession Rule in Corley v. United States, 129 S. Ct. 1558 (2009),
89 Neb. L. Rev.
Available at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol89/iss1/6