In which case did the Supreme Court rule that a confession obtained under coercive circumstances was inadmissible?

The Supreme Court ruled in Bram v. U.S. that a confession obtained under coercive circumstances was inadmissible due to the violation of the Fifth Amendment, which protects individuals from self-incrimination. This landmark case emphasized the importance of a voluntary confession, asserting that any confession derived from coercive police tactics is not reliable and goes against the fundamental fairness required in the judicial process.

In this case, the Court highlighted that confessions must be made freely and voluntarily, without any form of pressure or duress from law enforcement. The ruling established that involuntary confessions, arising from intimidation or coercive methods, cannot be used as evidence in court. This decision set a crucial precedent for safeguarding individual rights during police interrogations and reinforced the obligation of law enforcement to ensure that any statements made by suspects are given voluntarily.

Understanding this case is vital for law enforcement officers, as it underscores the importance of ethical interrogation techniques that respect constitutional rights.