A few days ago, Andrew robbed a convenience store employee of cash from the store's register. His mother needed a live-saving operation but Andrew had no money and his mother had no health insurance. His mother had been begging him to help her get the operation. The robbery went well, from Andrew's perspective, until a security guard became involved. After an exchange of gunfire with a security guard, Andrew made a successful escape by seriously wounding the security guard. Later, upon watching the evening news on television, Andrew became despondent over the injuries he had inflicted on the convenience store guard and went to confession at his parish. The parish priest suggested that the honest thing to do would be to return the money, turn himself over to the police, and make a full confession to them- just as he had confessed to the priest. The priest suggested prayer for his mother's health. Andrew went back to the convenience store and returned the money. He asked the new guard to phone the police. When the police arrived, Andrew made a complete confession and inquired how the injured store guard was doing in the hospital. The police officer did not interrupt Andrew, either to ask any questions or to offer any Miranda warning. The officer just listened intently after placing Andrew's hand in cuffs behind his back. The officer quickly captured the essence of the confession in his notebook and the notes were later transcribed to a computer database. Prior to the pending trial Andrew's attorney filed a motion to suppress the confession, alleging that it had been taken involuntarily by police. At the subsequent hearing, evidence revealed that Andrew had a history of mental problems and had been treated for them in the past. There was some testimony about how Andrew sometimes heard voices. The judge found that Andrew was competent and able to assist in his defense. The Procedural Problem Did Andrew make a free and voluntary confession to the officer sufficient so that the admission of the confession by a trial court should not violate Andrew's rights against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment? Analyze and discuss the legal issues and come to a definite conclusion concerning whether the confession was voluntarily and freely given and should be admitted or was involuntarily obtained and must be excluded