For almost 60 years a principle of law has existed in this state that prevents the government from introducing into evidence an unsigned confession. This time-worn rule is now being tested before the Supreme Court in a murder case.

The defendant in the case was charged with the murder of an 85-year-old woman. When the defendant surrendered to the local police he gave both a transcribed and informal confession.  The transcribed confession was in the form of questions and answers. Before the defendant had an opportunity to sign the transcribed confession, a lawyer appeared on his behalf and, as a result, defendant’s signature was never secured.

The detective who took the confession testified at trial to its contents without objection from the defendant’s lawyer.  During the testimony, the prosecutor distributed copies of the statement to jury.  The trial judge admitted the statement into evidence, again without objection from defendant’s counsel. The admissibility of the statement was first raised by the public defender’s office on appeal. In relying upon the well-settled principle of law recited above, the Appellate Division reversed the conviction.

Recently, the issue was argued before the Supreme Court.  A decision is expected the in due course.