What Is HeinOnline?
HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
Log In
![handle is hein.journals/alrcod9 and id is 1 raw text is:
DECEPTION IN PLACE OF EQUAL AND
IMPARTIAL ADMINISTRATION OF
JUSTICE: THE USE OF DECEPTION WHEN
INTERROGATING JUVENILES
EMILY A. MORAN*
IN TR O D U CTIO N ...................................................................................... . 2
I. JU V EN ILES ......................................................................................... . 8
A. Deception Often Used on Juveniles................................................ 9
B. Impact ofDeception on Juveniles .................................................. 10
C. Local and State Court Administrative Rules Protecting Juveniles........ 14
II. CURRENT DOJ POLICIES ON INTERROGATIONS .......................... 15
A. Legislative Rules v. Guiding Documents........................................ 15
B. Electronic Recording of Interrogations and Body-Worn Cameras........... 16
C. J ustice M anual ........................................................................ . 19
D. Interrogation Techniques and Other Deceptive Tactics Used by DO]..... 20
III. DOJ's POST-CONVICTION REVIEW FOR CONVICTIONS INVOLVING
H AIR A NALY SIS............................................................................... . 23
A. Wrongful Convictions Involving Hair Analysis .............................. 23
B. DO] Post-Conviction Review Process .......................................... 25
C. Impact on States ..................................................................... . 26
IV. RECOMMENDATIONS .........................................................................27
A . M em orandum ...............................................................................28
B. Including a New Provision in the Justice Manual........................... 30
C. Post-Conviction Review of Convictions Obtained Using Deceptive
T actics .................................................................................. . . 3 1
D . Counterargum ents..........................................................................33
* Emily A. Moran, J.D. Candidate, American University Washington College of Law
(2025), B.A. International Relations, Colgate University (2022). Thank you to the
Administrative Law Review staff for their valuable contributions to this piece. A special thanks to
my parents Leslie andJames Moran, and my brother Will Moran for their love and support
while writing this piece. I dedicate this Comment to those wrongly incarcerated because of
deceptive interrogation tactics.
1](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/alrcod9&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)