## Facts

- A rape occurred around 6:00 p.m. on April 7, 1954, in the basement of an apartment building where the victim sought help from the janitor’s household, which included 19-year-old Andrew R. Mallory.
- A masked assailant attacked the victim shortly after Mallory assisted with a hose; the victim described features resembling Mallory and relatives living there.
- Mallory and a nephew left the premises soon after the crime.
- Mallory was arrested the next afternoon (about 2:00–2:30 p.m.) and taken to police headquarters.
- At headquarters, multiple officers questioned him for roughly 30–45 minutes; he denied guilt.
- Around 4:00 p.m., officers sought lie-detector testing; Mallory agreed and waited for hours at headquarters while the operator was located.
- Mallory’s polygraph-related questioning began after 8:00 p.m.; officers testified he confessed around 9:30 p.m.
- Mallory was held near available committing magistrates but was not promptly taken before one; police attempted to arrange presentment only after the confession, and he was not presented until the following morning.
- Mallory was not advised of a right to counsel, a prompt preliminary examination before a magistrate, or a right to remain silent and that statements could be used against him.
- The trial court admitted the confession over objection; Mallory was convicted of rape and sentenced to death; the conviction was affirmed on appeal.

## Issues

1. Whether police violated Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 5(a) by failing to bring Mallory before a committing magistrate “without unnecessary delay.”
2. Whether a confession obtained during an unlawful delay in presentment must be excluded in a federal prosecution, apart from ordinary voluntariness analysis.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed and remanded.
- The Court held that Mallory was not taken before a committing magistrate without unnecessary delay as Rule 5(a) requires.
- Because the confession was obtained during a period of unlawful delay used for custodial interrogation, the confession was inadmissible.

## Legal Principles

- Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 5(a) requires that an arrested person be brought before a committing magistrate “without unnecessary delay.”
- When police use pre-presentment detention to interrogate a suspect instead of promptly initiating judicial supervision, the delay is “unnecessary” under Rule 5(a).
- Under the McNabb–Mallory doctrine (rooted in supervisory authority over federal criminal procedure), a confession obtained during an unlawful delay in presentment is inadmissible in federal court even if not shown to be coercive under traditional due process standards.
- Prompt presentment serves protective functions by shifting control from police to a magistrate and ensuring early judicial warnings and procedures.

## Conclusion

The Court ruled that Rule 5(a) forbids using delayed presentment to facilitate stationhouse interrogation and required exclusion of Mallory’s confession because it was obtained during unnecessary delay before a magistrate, necessitating reversal of his conviction.


Mallory v. United States, 354 U.S. 449 (1957)