United States v. Hilger

Summarized by:

  • Court: 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Archives
  • Area(s) of Law: Parole and Post-Prison Supervision
  • Date Filed: 08-26-2013
  • Case #: 12-30192
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Circuit Judge McKeown for the Court, Circuit Judge Ikuta and District Judge Carney
  • Full Text Opinion

The Opper rule, which requires corroboration of confessions, does not apply to supervised release revocation proceedings.

Jeffrey Hilger was convicted on child pornography charges, and on supervised release when he confessed to contact with minors, in violation of his release conditions. The district court revoked his supervised release after he confessed to multiple violations of his restriction on contacts with minors. The Ninth Circuit held that the Opper rule, which requires a conviction to rest on more than uncorroborated confessions in criminal prosecution, does not apply to supervised release revocation proceedings. The panel explained that revocation of parole is not part of criminal proceedings, it only deprives an individual of a conditional liberty dependent on the parole restrictions, and it does not deprive an individual of the right to confront unjust incarceration. The panel also held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in revoking supervised release based on his confession because the confession arose from a polygraph examination followed by an interview with a probation officer and testimony from his sister, which corroborated his confession of having contact with minors in six different instances. AFFIRMED.

Advanced Search