United States v. Mamah

Abdul Mamah (defendant) was federally charged with possession with intent to distribute more than 100 grams of heroin. In 2000, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents accompanied an informant to Mamah’s hotel, where the informant had arranged to buy narcotics from Mamah. Mamah consented to the FBI’s search of his hotel room. The FBI seized $5,000 cash and 300 grams of heroin from the hotel room, and FBI agents arrested Mamah. According to the FBI, Mamah initially claimed that he did not know about the heroin in his hotel room, but Mamah eventually admitted his guilt in a statement that an FBI agent transcribed and Mamah signed. At trial, Mamah sought to present two expert witnesses to support Mamah’s claim that he falsely confessed. One of the witnesses was Doctor Deborah Pellow, an anthropologist who specialized in Ghanaian culture. Pellow would have testified that living under Ghana’s military regime could condition Ghanaian nationals to adopt behaviors that would lead them to falsely confess during confrontations with law-enforcement officials. Mamah was a Ghanaian immigrant who had lived in the United States since 1984. Mamah claimed that Ghanaian authorities had detained and beaten him. The district court determined that Pellow’s testimony was inadmissible as expert testimony supporting Mamah’s false-confession claims. The district court emphasized its concerns that Pellow was not a clinical psychologist qualified to assess Mamah’s particular susceptibility to FBI interrogation techniques, and Mamah’s references to Ghanaian officials’ mistreatment could confuse and prejudice the jury, because Mamah had not accused the FBI agents of employing similarly violent interrogation tactics. Mamah was convicted. Mamah appealed, raising the sole issue that the district court had erred by finding Pellow’s expert testimony inadmissible.