Bill H.3922

HOUSE DOCKET, NO. 3934 FILED ON: 1/20/2023

HOUSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No. 3922

By Representative Lipper-Garabedian of Melrose, a petition (accompanied by bill, House, No. 3922) of Kate Lipper-Garabedian relative to preventing false confessions. The Judiciary.

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts

_______________

In the One Hundred and Ninety-Third General Court
(2023-2024)

_______________

An Act preventing false confessions.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

SECTION 1. Chapter 119 of the General Laws is hereby amended by inserting after section 89 the following sections:

Section 90. Prohibition on use of deception during juvenile interrogations

(a) As used in this section the following words shall, unless the context clearly requires otherwise, have the following meanings:

”Deception”, communicating, or relaying in any way, false or misleading facts, false or misleading information, false or misleading evidence, unauthorized implicit or explicit offers of leniency or any other circumstance found by a court to mislead the person being questioned.

“Interrogation”, any questioning by law enforcement officers, or persons acting on behalf of a law enforcement officer, in relation to an investigation of a misdemeanor or felony.

“Statement”, an oral assertion, written assertion or nonverbal conduct if intended as an assertion.

(b) Any statement made by a juvenile during an interrogation shall be presumed to be involuntary in any juvenile or criminal court where such statement is offered as evidence if during the interrogation a law enforcement officer, or person acting on behalf of a law enforcement officer, knowingly or recklessly engages in deception. Any such statement and any evidence that flows from that statement shall be presumed inadmissible.

(c) The presumption that a statement, evidence or both, as described in subsection (b), is inadmissible, may be overcome if the commonwealth proves, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the statement was voluntary reliable, and not a byproduct of any deception. A failure to electronically record a statement shall be a factor for the court to consider in determining whether the commonwealth can meet its burden.

(d) Nothing in this section shall abrogate the commonwealth’s burden to prove a statement is voluntary and reliable prior to introducing that statement into evidence.

(e) Subsections (b) through (d), inclusive, shall apply to all statements made on or after the effective date of this statute.

Section 91. Recording of Juvenile Interrogations

(a) As used in this section, the following words shall, unless the context clearly requires otherwise, have the following meanings:

“Custodial Interrogation”, an interview that occurs while a person is in custody involving a law enforcement officer’s questioning, or questioning by a person acting on behalf of a law enforcement officer, that is reasonably likely to elicit incriminating responses.

“Interrogation”, any questioning by law enforcement officers, or persons acting on behalf of a law enforcement officer, in relation to an investigation.

“Place of Detention”, a jail, police or sheriff’s station, holding cell, correctional or detention facility or other place where persons are held in connection with delinquency or criminal charges.

“Recording”, an audio and visual that creates an authentic, accurate, unaltered record of what transpired during an interrogation, capturing all parties involved in a custodial interrogation, beginning with any information by law enforcement about the purpose of the questioning or state of the investigation, including law enforcement officer’s recitation of the person’s constitutional rights, and ending when the interview is completed.

(b) All statements made by a person during a custodial interrogation in a place of detention or during protective custody relating to a delinquency proceeding or crime shall be electronically recorded. Failure to electronically record shall make any statement made during such custodial interrogation or any evidence resulting from the statement inadmissible.

(d) The presumption that such statement, as described in subsection (b), is inadmissible, may be overcome if the commonwealth proves that recording was not possible under the circumstances.

(e) Lack of economic resources relative to the implementation of recording shall not be considered grounds to conclude that recording was not possible under section (d).

SECTION 2. Chapter 233 of the General Laws is hereby amended by adding the following section:

Section 84. (a) As used in this section the following words shall, unless the context clearly requires otherwise, have the following meanings:

“Interrogation”, any questioning by law enforcement officers, or persons acting on behalf of a law enforcement officer, in relation to an investigation of a misdemeanor or felony.

“Statement”, an oral assertion, written assertion or nonverbal conduct if intended as an assertion.

(b) Any statement made during an interrogation shall be presumed to be involuntary in any court where such statement is offered as evidence in a criminal proceeding if during the interrogation a law enforcement officer, or person acting on behalf of a law enforcement officer, knowingly or recklessly engages in deception. Any such statement and any evidence that flows from that statement shall be presumed inadmissible.

(c) The presumption that such statement and/or evidence, as described in subsection (b), is inadmissible, may be overcome if the commonwealth proves, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the statement was voluntary, reliable and not a byproduct of any deception. A failure to electronically record a statement shall be a factor for the court to consider in determining whether the commonwealth can meet its burden.

(d) Nothing in this section shall abrogate the commonwealth’s burden to prove a statement is voluntary and reliable prior to introducing that statement into evidence.

(e) Subsections (b) through (d), inclusive, shall apply to all statements made on or after the effective date of this statute.

SECTION 3. Chapter 263 of the General Laws is hereby amended by inserting after section 1A the following section:

Section 1B. (a) As used in this section, the following words shall, unless the context clearly requires otherwise, have the following meanings:

“Custodial Interrogation”, an interview that occurs while a person is in custody involving a law enforcement officer’s questioning, or questioning by a person acting

on behalf of a law enforcement officer, that is reasonably likely to elicit incriminating responses.

“Interrogation”, any questioning by law enforcement officers, or persons acting on behalf of a law enforcement officer, in relation to an investigation.

“Place of Detention”, a jail, police or sheriff’s station, holding cell, correctional or detention facility or other place where persons are held in connection with criminal charges.

(b) All statements made by a person during a custodial interrogation in a place of detention or during protective custody relating to a crime shall be electronically recorded. Failure to electronically record shall make any statement made during such custodial interrogation or any evidence resulting from the statement inadmissible.

(d) The presumption that such statement, as described in subsection (b), is inadmissible, may be overcome if the commonwealth proves that recording was not possible under the circumstances.

(e) Lack of economic resources relative to the implementation of recording shall not be considered grounds to conclude that recording was not possible under section (d).

SECTION 4.

Nothing in this Act shall conflict with or abrogate the rights afforded to a minor child under any other law.

SECTION 5. This act shall take effect as of July 31, 2025, and shall apply to all statements made on or after that effective date.

Name:	District/Address:	Date Added:
Kate Lipper-Garabedian	32nd Middlesex	1/20/2023