Escobedo v. Illinois
378 U.S. 478 (1964)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 (1964)

Escobedo v. Illinois

No. 615

Argued April 29, 1964

Decided June 22, 1964

378 U.S. 478

Syllabus

Petitioner, a 22-year-old of Mexican extraction, was arrested with his sister and taken to police headquarters for interrogation in connection with the fatal shooting, about 11 days before, of his brother-in-law. He had been arrested shortly after the shooting, but had made no statement, and was released after his lawyer obtained a writ of habeas corpus from a state court. Petitioner made several requests to see his lawyer, who, though present in the building, and despite persistent efforts, was refused access to his client. Petitioner was not advised by the police of his right to remain silent and, after persistent questioning by the police, made a damaging statement to an Assistant State's Attorney which was admitted at the trial. Convicted of murder, he appealed to the State Supreme Court, which affirmed the conviction.

Held: Under the circumstances of this case, where a police investigation is no longer a general inquiry into an unsolved crime but has begun to focus on a particular suspect in police custody who has been refused an opportunity to consult with his counsel and who has not been warned of his constitutional right to keep silent, the accused has been denied the assistance of counsel in violation of the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments, and no statement extracted by the police during the interrogation may be used against him at a trial. Crooker v. California,357 U. S. 433, and Cicenia v. Lagay,357 U. S. 504, distinguished, and, to the extent that they may be inconsistent with the instant case, they are not controlling. Pp. 378 U. S. 479-492.

28 Ill.2d 41, 190 N.E.2d 825, reversed and remanded.

Page 378 U. S. 479

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.