New York boy disappears in 1979. Over 30 years later, a man with low IQ and a long history of mental illness and hallucinations is prosecuted for murder and kidnapping based on his confession—which occurred only after many hours of interrogations and before Miranda warnings, but which he repeated after being Mirandized. One jury hangs, and another convicts only after a week of deliberation and several notes inquiring about the voluntariness of the confessions. New York state courts: No constitutional problem. Federal district court: constitutional problem but any error was harmless. Second Circuit: Um, there's a Supreme Court case directly on point (Missouri v. Seibert) saying police can't do this confession-Mirandize-repeat maneuver. “The court instruction was clearly wrong” and “manifestly prejudicial.” Habeas granted. And you must release him “unless the State affords him a new trial within a reasonable period as the district court shall set.”
The case is Hernandez v. McIntosh, No. 24-1816 (2d Cir. 2025).