Tobias v. Arteaga

Coerced confession claims cannot be asserted under a fabrication of evidence theory; coercive interrogation exists when officer’s tactics undermine suspect’s ability to exercise free will, rendering statements involuntary; court denies qualified immunity on Fifth Amendment claim that officers continued to question juvenile after he invoked right to silence, requested attorney, and that officers threatened juvenile with harsher penalties if he continued to “lie” and did not confess; juvenile’s statement, “Could I have an attorney? Because that’s not me,” was an unequivocal invocation of Fifth Amendment right to counsel; any suggestion by officer that exercise of right to remain silent may result in harsher treatment is unconstitutionally coercive; court recognizes Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process theory for interrogation that amounts to “psychological torture,” but in highly questionable opinion affords qualified immunity to officers here because questioning lasted for “only” two hours, less than in other cases where claim was sustained.