Arizona v. Fulminante: Extending Harmless-Error Analysis to the Erroneous Admission of Coerced Confessions

Recent Development by J.L. Renfro

Following his conviction on weapons charges, Oreste Fulminante was incarcerated at Ray Brook Federal Correctional Facility in New York. While at Ray Brook, he was befriended by fellow prisoner Anthony Sarivola, a former police officer who was serving a sixty-day sentence for extortion. Sarivola heard a rumor that Fulminante had killed his eleven-year-old stepdaughter in Arizona. When Sarivola confronted Fulminante regarding the rumor, Fulminante denied that it was true. Unbeknownst to Fulminante, Sarivola was an FBI informant who, upon reporting the prison rumors to the FBI, was instructed to uncover more information. Sarivola broached the subject with Fulminante several times, adding that he knew that Fulminante had been harassed by other inmates. Sarivola, who was posing as an organized-crime figure, told Fulminante that he could protect him, but only if Fulminante would tell him the truth. Consequently, Fulminante confessed that he had sexually assaulted and killed his stepdaughter. After Sarivola reported this information to the FBI, Fulminante was indicted on murder charges in Arizona. At trial, Fulminante's attorney attempted to suppress the statement that Fulminante had made to Sarivola in prison, arguing that it was coerced, but the trial judge admitted the confession as evidence. Fulminante was convicted of his stepdaughter's murder and sentenced to death. On appeal, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that the confession was involuntary, but its admission was harmless error inlight of the overwhelming evidence against Fulminante. On reconsideration, the court ruled that United States Supreme Court precedent prohibited it from applying harmless-error analysis to the erroneous admission of a coerced confession. Thus, the court reversed the conviction and ordered that a new trial be conducted without Fulminante's statement to Sarivola. The Supreme Court granted the State's petition for certiorari and held that harmless-error analysis applies to the admission of coerced confessions. Arizona v. Fulminante, 111 S.Ct. 1246 (1991).


About the Author

J.L. Renfro.

Citation

66 Tul. L. Rev. 581 (1991)