## Facts

- A confectionery store was robbed near midnight on October 14, 1945, and the owner, William Karam, was shot and killed.
- Robert Haley, a 15-year-old Black boy, was prosecuted for first-degree murder on a theory that he participated in the robbery as a lookout with two older youths.
- Haley was arrested at his home around midnight on October 19, 1945, and taken to police headquarters.
- Shortly after midnight, police questioned Haley for about five hours, until roughly 5 a.m.
- Five or six officers questioned him in relays; Haley was held and questioned without any friend, parent, or counsel present.
- During interrogation, Haley was shown alleged confessions of the other suspects; he then confessed.
- Police prepared a typed question-and-answer written confession, preceded by a formulaic statement that he had constitutional rights and could choose whether to speak.
- The confession was admitted at trial over Haley’s claim that it was coerced, and he was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment.

## Issues

1. Whether admitting a confession from a 15-year-old obtained through prolonged late-night custodial interrogation, without counsel or a friendly adult present, violated the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause.
2. Whether formal recitals of constitutional rights in a written statement can render such a confession voluntary when the surrounding interrogation conditions are coercive.
3. Whether the Supreme Court must independently assess voluntariness despite state-court findings that a confession was voluntary.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the judgment sustaining Haley’s conviction.
- The Court held that the confession was involuntary under the Due Process Clause given the totality of circumstances, including Haley’s youth, the all-night interrogation, the use of multiple officers in relays, and the absence of counsel or a supportive adult.
- The Court rejected reliance on a post hoc, formulaic warning in the written statement as sufficient to cure coercive interrogation conditions.
- The Court reaffirmed its duty to independently examine the record on voluntariness notwithstanding the trial court’s admission of the confession and the jury’s finding of voluntariness.

## Legal Principles

- The Supreme Court independently reviews whether a confession was voluntary for federal due process purposes; state-court determinations do not control.
- Voluntariness is evaluated under the totality of circumstances, including age, length and timing of questioning, isolation, interrogation methods, and access to counsel or a responsible adult.
- Juveniles require heightened protection in assessing coercion; practices that might be tolerated with adults may be coercive when applied to children.
- Formal statements of rights or “voluntary” language in a confession cannot legitimize interrogation methods that, in context, overbear the suspect’s will.

## Conclusion

The Court set aside Haley’s conviction because a five-hour, late-night custodial interrogation of a 15-year-old, conducted in isolation and without counsel or a friendly adult, produced an involuntary confession that could not be used consistently with Fourteenth Amendment due process.


Haley v. Ohio, 332 U.S. 596 (1948)