subject: Virginia Murder Voluntary Intoxication Shooting 18.2-32 Use Of A Firearm 18.2-53.1 [print this page] Virginia Murder Voluntary Intoxication Shooting 18.2-32 Use Of A Firearm 18.2-53.1
Avent v. Commonwealth, 279 Va. 175, 197 (2010).
Cardell Lamont Avent was convicted by a jury on charges of first-degree murder in violation of Code 18.2-32 and use of a firearm in the commission of a felony in violation of Code 18.2-53.1. He appealed his convictions for first-degree murder and the use of a firearm in the commission of a felony.
The record indicated that defendant's will was not overborne and his capacity for self-determination was not impaired during questioning. Avent was apprised of his Miranda rights by the interrogating officer, he was given food and an opportunity to sleep, and he described himself as calm and comfortable throughout the questioning. Avent testified that the officers never touched him, and he did not feel threatened or scared by the officers. On a number of occasions during the hearing, Avent responded that he understood what was occurring during the interrogation.
If the suspect's will has been overborne and his capacity for self-determination critically impaired, a confession is considered involuntary and its use is unconstitutional. All police interviews of suspects have coercive aspects to them by virtue of the fact that the interrogating officer is part of a system which may ultimately charge the suspect with a crime. The test to be applied in determining voluntariness is whether the statement is the product of an essentially free and unconstrained choice by its maker, or whether the maker's will has been overborne and his capacity for self-determination critically impaired.
In determining whether a defendant's will has been overborne, courts look to the totality of all the surrounding circumstances, including the defendant's background and experience and the conduct of the police.
