In a separate dissent that focused on the Martinez case, Stevens called the hospital questioning "the functional equivalent of an attempt to obtain an involuntary confession from a prisoner by torturous methods."
The fractured ruling left lawyers uncertain about what happens next in the Martinez case. His suit will return to a federal judge in Los Angeles, or possibly the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
The Los Angeles lawyer who sued the city of Oxnard on Martinez's behalf stressed that Tuesday's ruling does not affect the main claim that police violated his rights by shooting him.
"The excessive force claim is ready for trial," Samuel Paz said. "I'm saddened they used this case to chip away at our Constitution."
Alan Wisotsky, Oxnard's lawyer, said the ruling vindicated the police department's major contention at this stage of the case.
"I said from the beginning there is no right to silence, and I think the court has confirmed that," he said. "The shooting itself was put on the back burner, but that's the real issue now. We think we have a strong case."
The two sides disagree on who was to blame for the shooting that left the then-29-year-old Martinez paralyzed.
It was dark on the evening of Nov. 28, 1997, when two Oxnard officers stopped to question a possible drug suspect near a row of small homes. From the opposite direction, Martinez rode up on his squeaky bike, heading toward his girlfriend's house.
When he approached, an officer called for him to halt. He did so, but when the officer grabbed for the field knife on his belt, a scuffle ensued.
"He's got my gun," the first officer called out. A second officer then fired five shots, hitting Martinez in the eyes and in his lower back. He was left blind and was paralyzed below the waist.
Minutes later, Sgt. Ben Chavez, the patrol supervisor, arrived and jumped into the ambulance. He hoped to get a statement from the dying man.
On the tape made in the emergency room, Martinez can be heard screaming in pain.
"What happened?" Chavez asked.
"The police shot me," Martinez replied. "I am dying!"
"OK, yes, you are dying. But tell me why you are fighting with the police," Chavez continued. The interrogation continued off and on over 45 minutes.
Martinez survived and sued the Oxnard police for illegal arrest, excessive use of force and the coercive interrogation in the emergency room.
A federal judge in Los Angeles cleared the full case to go to trial.
Oxnard's lawyers challenged the claim against Chavez involving the emergency room questioning, but the 9th Circuit agreed Martinez' constitutional rights were violated. "No reasonable officer would believe that an interview of an individual receiving treatment for life-threatening injuries ... was constitutionally permissible," the appeals court said.
But the Supreme Court took up Oxnard's appeal, and the Bush administration joined the case on the city's side.
In Chavez vs. Martinez, the court reversed the 9th Circuit's ruling allowing the Oxnard police to be held liable for violating the 5th Amendment.
But the appeals court will probably have to reconsider whether the emergency room questioning is a type of outrageous conduct that is unconstitutional.
The two sides might also settle the suit before it goes to trial.
