Bill Text: FL S0296 | 2017 | Regular Session | Introduced


Bill Title: Statements Made by a Criminal Defendant

Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 1-0)

Status: (Failed) 2017-05-05 - Died in Judiciary [S0296 Detail]

Download: Florida-2017-S0296-Introduced.html
       Florida Senate - 2017                                     SB 296
       
       
        
       By Senator Bracy
       
       11-00403-17                                            2017296__
    1                        A bill to be entitled                      
    2         An act relating to statements made by a criminal
    3         defendant; amending s. 90.803, F.S.; requiring that
    4         hearsay statements made during certain custodial
    5         interrogations comply with specified requirements in
    6         order to be admissible; defining terms; describing
    7         circumstances in which an oral, written, or sign
    8         language statement made by an interrogee during a
    9         custodial interrogation is presumed inadmissible as
   10         evidence against such person unless certain
   11         requirements are met; describing circumstances in
   12         which the prosecution may rebut such presumption;
   13         describing circumstances in which law enforcement
   14         officers may have had good cause not to electronically
   15         record all or part of an interrogation; defining the
   16         term “good cause”; providing for the admissibility of
   17         certain statements of an interrogee when made in
   18         certain proceedings or when obtained by federal
   19         officers or officers from other jurisdictions;
   20         requiring the preservation of electronic recordings;
   21         providing that admissibility is not precluded for
   22         certain statements of an interrogee; amending s.
   23         90.804, F.S.; specifying requirements that must be met
   24         for a hearsay statement against interest made during
   25         certain custodial interrogations to be admissible when
   26         the declarant is unavailable; providing a finding of
   27         important state interest; specifying the purpose of
   28         the act; providing an effective date.
   29          
   30  Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:
   31  
   32         Section 1. Subsection (18) of section 90.803, Florida
   33  Statutes, is amended to read:
   34         90.803 Hearsay exceptions; availability of declarant
   35  immaterial.—The provision of s. 90.802 to the contrary
   36  notwithstanding, the following are not inadmissible as evidence,
   37  even though the declarant is available as a witness:
   38         (18) ADMISSIONS.—A statement that is offered against a
   39  party and is:
   40         (a) The party’s own statement in either an individual or a
   41  representative capacity;
   42         (b) A statement of which the party has manifested an
   43  adoption or belief in its truth;
   44         (c) A statement by a person specifically authorized by the
   45  party to make a statement concerning the subject;
   46         (d) A statement by the party’s agent or servant concerning
   47  a matter within the scope of the agency or employment thereof,
   48  made during the existence of the relationship; or
   49         (e) A statement by a person who was a coconspirator of the
   50  party during the course, and in furtherance, of the conspiracy.
   51  Upon request of counsel, the court shall instruct the jury that
   52  the conspiracy itself and each member’s participation in it must
   53  be established by independent evidence, either before the
   54  introduction of any evidence or before evidence is admitted
   55  under this paragraph; or.
   56         (f) The party’s own statement that is the result of a
   57  custodial interrogation conducted in compliance with this
   58  paragraph.
   59         1. As used in this paragraph, the term:
   60         a. “Custodial interrogation” or “interrogation” means
   61  questioning of an interrogee in circumstances in which a
   62  reasonable person placed in the same position would believe that
   63  his or her freedom of action was curtailed to a degree
   64  associated with actual arrest.
   65         b. “Electronic recording” means a true, complete, and
   66  accurate reproduction of a custodial interrogation. An
   67  electronic recording may be created through the use of
   68  videotape, audiotape, or digital or other media.
   69         c. “Interrogation facility” means a law enforcement
   70  facility, correctional facility, community correctional center,
   71  detention facility, law enforcement vehicle, courthouse, or
   72  other secure environment.
   73         d. “Interrogee” means a person who, at the time of the
   74  interrogation and concerning any topic of the interrogation, is:
   75         (I) Charged with a felony; or
   76         (II) Suspected by those conducting the interrogation of
   77  involvement in a felony.
   78         e. “Involvement” means participation in a crime as a
   79  principal or an accessory.
   80         2. An oral, written, or sign-language statement made by an
   81  interrogee during a custodial interrogation is inadmissible as
   82  evidence against such person in a criminal proceeding unless all
   83  of the following requirements are met:
   84         a. The interrogation is reproduced in its entirety by means
   85  of an electronic recording.
   86         b. Immediately before the interrogation begins, and as part
   87  of the electronic recording, the interrogee is given all
   88  constitutionally required warnings and the interrogee knowingly,
   89  intelligently, and voluntarily waives any rights set out in the
   90  warnings that would, absent such waiver, otherwise preclude the
   91  admission of the statement.
   92         c. The electronic recording device was capable of making a
   93  true, complete, and accurate recording of the interrogation, the
   94  operator of such device was competent, and the electronic
   95  recording has not been altered.
   96         d. All persons recorded on the electronic recording who are
   97  material to the custodial interrogation are identified on the
   98  electronic recording.
   99         e. During discovery pursuant to Rule 3.220, Florida Rules
  100  of Criminal Procedure, but in no circumstances later than the
  101  20th day before the date of the proceeding in which the
  102  prosecution intends to offer the statement, the attorney
  103  representing an interrogee is provided with true, complete, and
  104  accurate copies of all electronic recordings of the interrogee
  105  which are made pursuant to this paragraph.
  106         3.a. In the absence of a true, complete, and accurate
  107  electronic recording, the prosecution may rebut a presumption of
  108  inadmissibility only by offering clear and convincing evidence
  109  that:
  110         (I) The statement was both voluntary and reliable, made
  111  after the interrogee was fully advised of all constitutionally
  112  required warnings; and
  113         (II) Law enforcement officers had good cause not to
  114  electronically record all or part of the interrogation.
  115         b. For purposes of sub-subparagraph a., the term “good
  116  cause” includes, but is not limited to, the following:
  117         (I) The interrogation occurred in a location other than an
  118  interrogation facility under exigent circumstances where the
  119  requisite recording equipment was not readily available and
  120  there was no reasonable opportunity to move the interrogee to an
  121  interrogation facility or to another location where the
  122  requisite recording equipment was readily available;
  123         (II) The interrogee refused to have the interrogation
  124  electronically recorded, and such refusal was electronically
  125  recorded;
  126         (III) The failure to electronically record an entire
  127  interrogation was the result of equipment failure, and obtaining
  128  replacement equipment was not feasible; or
  129         (IV) The statement of the interrogee was obtained in the
  130  course of intercepting wire, oral, or electronic communication
  131  which was being conducted pursuant to a properly obtained and
  132  issued warrant or which required no warrant and was otherwise
  133  legally conducted.
  134         4. Notwithstanding any other provision of this paragraph, a
  135  written, oral, or sign-language statement of the interrogee
  136  which was made as a result of a custodial interrogation is
  137  admissible in a criminal proceeding against the interrogee in
  138  this state if:
  139         a. The statement was obtained in another jurisdiction by
  140  investigative personnel of that jurisdiction, acting
  141  independently of law enforcement personnel of this state, in
  142  compliance with the laws of that jurisdiction; or
  143         b. The statement was obtained by a federal officer in this
  144  state or another jurisdiction during a lawful federal
  145  investigation and was obtained in compliance with the laws of
  146  the United States.
  147         5. Every electronic recording of a custodial interrogation
  148  made pursuant to this paragraph must be preserved until the
  149  interrogee’s conviction for any offense relating to the
  150  interrogation is final and all direct appeals and collateral
  151  challenges are exhausted, the prosecution of such offenses is
  152  barred by law, or the state irrevocably waives in writing any
  153  future prosecution of the interrogee for any offense relating to
  154  the interrogation.
  155         6. This paragraph does not preclude the admission into
  156  evidence of a statement made by the interrogee:
  157         a. At his or her trial or other hearing held in open court;
  158         b. Before a grand jury;
  159         c. Which is the res gestae of the arrest or the offense; or
  160         d. Which does not arise from a custodial interrogation or
  161  which is a spontaneous statement.
  162         Section 2. Paragraph (c) of subsection (2) of section
  163  90.804, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
  164         90.804 Hearsay exceptions; declarant unavailable.—
  165         (2) HEARSAY EXCEPTIONS.—The following are not excluded
  166  under s. 90.802, provided that the declarant is unavailable as a
  167  witness:
  168         (c) Statement against interest.—A statement which, at the
  169  time of its making, was so far contrary to the declarant’s
  170  pecuniary or proprietary interest or tended to subject the
  171  declarant to liability or to render invalid a claim by the
  172  declarant against another, so that a person in the declarant’s
  173  position would not have made the statement unless he or she
  174  believed it to be true. A statement tending to expose the
  175  declarant to criminal liability and offered to exculpate the
  176  accused is inadmissible, unless corroborating circumstances show
  177  the trustworthiness of the statement. However, any statement
  178  made during a custodial interrogation of an interrogee as
  179  defined in s. 90.803(18)(f) must comply with that paragraph when
  180  required in order for the statement to be admissible under this
  181  paragraph.
  182         Section 3. (1) The Legislature finds that the reputations
  183  of countless hard-working law enforcement officers are
  184  needlessly attacked by criminal suspects who falsely claim the
  185  officers violated the suspects’ constitutional rights, that
  186  limited trial court resources are squandered in hearings on
  187  motions to suppress statements made by criminal suspects who are
  188  able to make such claims because no recordings of their
  189  interrogations exist, and, further, that judicial resources are
  190  squandered when criminal suspects, after having been convicted
  191  of their crimes, file frivolous and unnecessary appeals. This
  192  process costs the taxpayers of this state untold dollars each
  193  year, dollars that could be better spent enhancing the
  194  administration of the criminal justice system. Low-cost
  195  technology is now available in every jurisdiction to record each
  196  custodial interrogation of a criminal suspect, eliminating this
  197  gross waste of resources and enhancing the reliability and
  198  reputation of law enforcement officers. Therefore, the
  199  Legislature determines and declares that this act fulfills an
  200  important state interest.
  201         (2) The purpose of this act is to require the creation of
  202  an electronic record of an entire custodial interrogation in
  203  order to eliminate disputes about interrogations, thereby
  204  improving prosecution of the guilty while affording protection
  205  to the innocent and increasing court efficiency.
  206         Section 4. This act shall take effect July 1, 2017.

feedback