Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:


Chavez v. Martinez

Docket No.: 01-1444
Certiorari Granted: Jun 3 2002
Argued: December 4, 2002
Decided: May 27, 2003


Self-Incrimination, Criminal Procedure, Civil Rights, Civil Rights Acts, Liability, Self-Incrimination, 14th Amendment, 4th Amendment, Bill of Rights, Due Process, Fifth Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment, Fourth Amendment, Internal Revenue Code, Miranda, Section 1983, Self-Incrimination, habeas, habeas corpus, murder, probable cause, qualified immunity, self-incrimination

PartyNames: Ben Chavez v. Oliverio Martinez
Petitioner: Ben Chavez
Respondent: Oliverio Martinez

Court Below: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Citation: CA 9, 270 F.3d 852. QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. Whether the Ninth Circuit panel correctl y characterized the Supreme Court's FifthAmendment discussion in United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259 (1990), as non-binding dicta and thereby ignored its holding favorable to petitioner. 2. Whether a violation of the Fifth Amendment, potentially resulting in an award of civil damages, occurs at the time of the purported coercive interview or only when and if the state introduces the constituti onally violative statement in a criminal proceeding.3. Whether the Ninth Circuit panel correctly held that the conduct of this
Supreme Court Docket

Ben Chavez
Oliverio Martinez
538 U.S. 760 (2003)

Are a suspect's Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and his Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process right to be free from coercive questioning violated when he was subjected to coercive questioning while in police custody, even if his coerced statements were never used against him in a criminal case?

Chavez v. Martinez

December 4, 2002

Holding: reversed and remanded
Decision: Decision: 6 votes for Chavez, 3 vote(s) against

Chavez v. Martinez
Case Documents

1Opinion in Chavez v. Martinez
2Opinion in Chavez v. Martinez
Additional documents for this case are pending review.