Nix V. Williams Summary
Case Citation: Nix v. Williams - 467 U.S. 431 (1984)
Facts: In 1968, 10 year old Pamela Powers was abducted and murdered outside of the YMCA in Des Moines, Iowa. A young boy claimed to have seen Williams, outside the YMCA carrying a bundle wrapped in a blanket with two white legs hanging out. The following day Williams, car was spotted approximately 160 miles outside of Des Moines. Additionally, several of the young girls clothing items were found. ; Along with Williams and with the blanket as described by the witness. Based upon these findings, a warrant was issued for Williams’ arrest. While a search was under way, Williams surrendered to the Davenport police, and obtained counsel. Des Moines police advised Williams counsel that they …show more content…
Evidence that is obtained through unlawful police conduct that would have been discovered inevitably during the course of an investigation does not have to be excluded from trial
Reasoning: Justice Burger wrote the decision of the Court, joined by Justice White, Justice Blackmun, Justice Powell, Justice Rehnquist and Justice O’Connor, and reversed the decision of the appellant court.
1.) The Inevitable Discovery Rule
If the prosecution is able to establish through a preponderance of evidence that the information ultimately would have been discovered lawfully, then the evidence should be allowed. It was inevitable that the body would have been found. If Williams had not led the police to the victim’s body, the search teams would have eventually discovered the body. The body was located only 2 and half miles away from where the nearest search team originally started looking.
2.) Exclusion would not result in fairness.
Evidence has demonstrated that at the time of unconstitutional interrogation, a search was already in place for the victim, and the body would have inevitably been found. This means had there not be illegal conduct by the police officers, the fairness of the trial would have remained the
Facts: In 1968, 10 year old Pamela Powers was abducted and murdered outside of the YMCA in Des Moines, Iowa. A young boy claimed to have seen Williams, outside the YMCA carrying a bundle wrapped in a blanket with two white legs hanging out. The following day Williams, car was spotted approximately 160 miles outside of Des Moines. Additionally, several of the young girls clothing items were found. ; Along with Williams and with the blanket as described by the witness. Based upon these findings, a warrant was issued for Williams’ arrest. While a search was under way, Williams surrendered to the Davenport police, and obtained counsel. Des Moines police advised Williams counsel that they …show more content…
Evidence that is obtained through unlawful police conduct that would have been discovered inevitably during the course of an investigation does not have to be excluded from trial
Reasoning: Justice Burger wrote the decision of the Court, joined by Justice White, Justice Blackmun, Justice Powell, Justice Rehnquist and Justice O’Connor, and reversed the decision of the appellant court.
1.) The Inevitable Discovery Rule
If the prosecution is able to establish through a preponderance of evidence that the information ultimately would have been discovered lawfully, then the evidence should be allowed. It was inevitable that the body would have been found. If Williams had not led the police to the victim’s body, the search teams would have eventually discovered the body. The body was located only 2 and half miles away from where the nearest search team originally started looking.
2.) Exclusion would not result in fairness.
Evidence has demonstrated that at the time of unconstitutional interrogation, a search was already in place for the victim, and the body would have inevitably been found. This means had there not be illegal conduct by the police officers, the fairness of the trial would have remained the