Document: 378 U.S. 478 84 S.Ct. 1758 12 L.Ed.2d 977 Danny ESCOBEDO, Petitioner,v.STATE OF ILLINOIS. No. 615. Argued April 29, 1964. Decided June 22, Barry L. Kroll, Park Forest, Ill., for petitioner. Bernard Weisberg, Chicago, American Civil Liberties Union, as amicus curiae. James R. Thompson, respondent. Mr. Justice GOLDBERG delivered the opinion of Court. 1 The critical question in this case is whether, under circumstances, refusal by police to honor petitioner's request consult with his lawyer during course an interrogation constitutes a denial 'the Assistance Counsel' violation Sixth Amendment Constitution 'made obligatory upon States Fourtee th Amendment,' Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 335, 342, 83 792, 795, 9 799, and thereby renders inadmissible state criminal trial any incriminating statement elicited interrogation. 2 On night January 19, 1960, brother-in-law was fatally shot. In early hours next morning, at 2:30 a.m., petitioner arrested without warrant interrogated. Petitioner made no released 5 that afternoon pursuant court writ habeas corpus obtained Warren Wolfson, who had been retained 3 30, Benedict DiGerlando, then custody later indicted murder along petitioner, told fired fatal shots. Between 8 evening, sister, widow deceased, were taken headquarters. En route station, 'had handcuffed defendant behind back,' 'one arresting officers DiGerlando named him one shot' deceased. testified, contradiction, 'detective said they us pretty well, up tight, we might well admit crime,' he replied, 'I am sorry but I would like have advice from my lawyer.' A officer testified although not formally charged 'he custody' 'couldn't walk out door.' Shortly after reached headquarters, arrived. described ensuing events following terms: 4 'On day received phone call (from mother another defendant') went Detective Bureau 11th State. first person talked Sergeant on duty Desk, Pidgeon. asked Pidgeon permission speak client, Escobedo. * lockup informed me boy Homicide Bureau. This between 9:30 10:00 evening. Before anywhere, called them there attorney waiting see He could him. Then upstairs There several Detectives around them. identified myself Escobedo's They not. Chief Flynn duty. client. think it approximately 11:00 o'clock. couldn't because hadn't completed questioning. (F)or second or two spotted office door open through office. waved back closed, Homicide.1 four five milling Detail night. As whether Captain day, waited hour again renewed (sic) filed official complaint Commissioner Phelan Chicago Police Department. conversation every find. get corpus. left State 1:00 A.M. (Sunday morning) opportunity talk client quoted Section Criminal Code which allows right client.'2 repeatedly 'didn't want see' testimony confirmed these accounts substantial detail. 6 Notwithstanding repeated requests each, afforded entire At point, previously noted, came into each other's view few moments quickly ushered away. 'that heard detective telling latter be allowed (him) 'until done" being refused remain adjoining room. until 'we interrogating' 7 interrogation, 22-year-old Mexican extraction record previous experience police, 'was handcuffed'3 standing position nervous, circles eyes upset' 'agitated' slept over week.' It undisputed Officer Montejano, 'grew up' neighborhood, knew family, uses 'Spanish language (his) work,' conferred alone 'for about quarter *.' 'in Spanish sister go home if pinned DiGerlando,' held only witnesses, anything, against *, able night.' issue assurance. Montejano denied offering such occurred: 10 what when did, (lying) said, 'Would you care tell that?' 'Yes, will.' So, brought Escobedo confronted lying didn't shoot Manuel, did it." 11 way, time admitted some knowledge crime. After additional statements further implicating himself plot. point Assistant State's Attorney, Theodore J. Cooper, summoned 'to take' statement. experienced assigned Division take 'statements defendants prisoners custody,' 'took' asking carefully framed questions apparently designed assure admissibility evidence resulting answers. Cooper advise constitutional rights, so advised moved both before suppress statement, motions denied. co victed appealed conviction. 13 Supreme Court Illinois, its original February 1, 1963, reversed said: 14 '(I)t seems manifest us, circumstances surrounding shortly prior thereto, understood permitted gave granted immunity prosecution.' 15 Compare Lynumn 528, 917, 922. 16 petitioned for, granted, rehearing. affirmed '(T)he making promise trier fact believed We find reason disturbing court's finding confession voluntary.'4 28 Ill.2d 41, 45—46, 190 N.E.2d 825, 827. also held, authority Court's decisions Crooker California, 357 433, 78 1287, 1448, Cicenia LaGay, 504, 1297, 1523, admissible even though 'it requested assistance counsel, denied.' Ill.2d, 46, N.E.2d, certiorari consider constitutionally trial. 375 902, 203, 143. conclude, reasons stated below, and, accordingly, reverse judgment 17 Massiah United States, 377 201, 1199, observed 'a guarantees aid counsel surely vouchsafe less completely extrajudicial proceeding. Anything deny 'effective representation stage legal help him." Id., U.S., 204, S.Ct., 1202, quoting DOUGLAS, J., concurring Spano New York, 360 315, 326, 79 1209, 1265. 18 here conducted indicted. But context case, should make difference. When requested, denied, lawyer, investigation ceased general 'an unsolved crime.' 327, 1209 (STEWART, concurring). become accused, purpose 'get him' confess guilt despite do so. arrest throughout convincing Without informing absolute silent face accusation, urged statement.5 many years ago: 19 'It cannot doubted that, placed accused other suspected crime, result produce mind fear remained silent, considered admission guilt, therefore render certain committed guilty person, conceived converse impression naturally arisen denying, hope removing suspicion himself.' Bram 168 532, 562, 183, 194, 42 L.Ed. 568. 20 Petitioner, layman, undoubtedly unaware Illinois law 'mere' complicity plot legally damaging firing Escobedo, 825. 'guiding hand counsel' essential rights delicate situation. Powell Alabama, 287 45, 69, 53 55, 64, 77 158. 'stage advice' most supra, 1202. arraignment Hamilton 368 52, 82 157, 114, preliminary hearing White Maryland, 373 59, 1050, 193. What happened certainly 'affect whole trial,' 54, 159 since 'may irretrievably lost, asserted, are represented waives strategic purposes.' Ibid. exalt form substance depend authorities secured formal indictment. had, all practical purposes, already murder. 21 York Appeals, whose cited approval Massiah, 205, has recently recognized those here, meaningful distinction can drawn People Donovan, N.Y.2d 148, 243 N.Y.S.2d 841, 193 628, court, Judge Fuld, 'confession defendant, period detention (prior indictment), access used trial.6 151, 842, 629. 'would highly incongruous our system justice district attorney, representing State, extract while own seeking kept police.' 152, 629.7 22 federal, entitled trial.8 rule sought however, more than appeal interrogation; 'right use (would be) very hollow thing (if), conviction assured pretrial examination.' re Groban, 352 330, 344, 510, 519, 376 (BLACK, dissenting).9 'One imagine cynical prosecutor saying: "Let illustrious now. can't escape noose. nothing trial." Ex parte Sullivan, D.C., 107 F.Supp. 514, 517—518. 23 argued indictment, number confessions will diminish significantly, indictment,10 'any worth salt suspect uncertain terms circumstances.' Watts Indiana, 338 49, 69 1347, 1357, 93 1801 (Jackson, part dissenting part). argument, course, cuts ways. points nature needed. 1202; supra; supra. indeed began obtained. necessarily direct relationship importance their quest criticalness need advice. Our Constitution, unlike others, strikes balance favor privilege self-incrimination. See note, 73 Yale L.J. 1000, 1048—1051 (1964). 24 learned lesson history, ancient modern, enforcement. comes 'confession' will, long run, reliable11 subject abuses12 depends extrinsic independently skillful investigation. Dean Wigmore wisely 25 '(A)ny administration permits prosecution trust habitually compulsory self-disclosure source proof must itself suffer morally thereby. inclination develops rely mainly evidence, satisfied incomplete sources. exercise power answers begets forgetfulness just limitations power. simple peaceful process questioning breeds readiness resort bullying physical force torture. If answer, soon expected answer,—that is, guilt. Thus legitimate grows unjust abuse; ultimately, innocent jeopardized encroachments bad system. Such systems where recognized.' Wigmore, Evidence (3d ed. 1940), 309. (Emphasis original.) 'history amply shows often extorted save enforcement officials trouble effort obtaining valid independent Haynes Washington, 503, 1336, 1346. 26 companion history can, should, survive continued effectiveness citizens' abdication unawareness rights. No preserving aware of, exercise, rights.13 thwart enforcement, something wrong system.14 27 hold, therefore, where, longer inquiry crime begun focus particular suspect, custody, carry interrogations lends eliciting tatements, effectively warned 'The Fourteenth 795 may does compel contrary result. merely rejected 'every contact (is) infringement regard case.' 440, 1292. place, announced: 29 '(S)tate engage violates due deprived merits, proceedings, provided prejudiced infact subsequent absence fundamental fairness concept justice.' determination 439—440, added.) 30 Court, applying 'these principles' sum total (there) counsel,' id., 1292 concluded fundamentally counsel. Among distinguish there, explicitly 'say anything' response questions, 437, 1290, well-educated man studied attending school year. La Gay, decided same 'contention confer disposed California That adds nothing, Crooker. event, extent inconsistent principles announced today, regarded controlling.15 31 Nothing today affects powers investigate concurring), gathering information witnesses 'proper investigative efforts.' hold shifts investigatory accusatory—when elicit confession—our adversary begins operate, lawyer. 32 remanded proceedings opinion. 33 Reversed remanded. 34 HARLAN, dissenting. 35 affirm basis six ago. Like Brother White, post, p. 495, ill-conceived seriously unjustifiably fetters perfectly methods 36 STEWART, 37 directly controlled judgment. 38 here. federal grand jury Massiah. entered plea guilty. Under indictment followed trial, counsel.* bail, thereafter agents Federal Government deliberately basic protections guarantee. Putting side now vital remains involve deliberate initiation judicial disregards difference present Massiah's, bland assertion difference.' Ante, 485. 39 fact,' submit, makes institution formal, way information, arraignment, marks ended commenced. attach pertain speedy confrontation, jury. Another guarantee 792; 157; 1050. 40 holds voluntary one. given says 'affected' always supposed 'affect' murderer, incompetent, unsuccessful, corrupt 'constitutional rights' confessed never requires give 'advice' these. 41 Supported stronger rhetoric, converts routine distorted analogue imports concepts historically applicable onset prosecutorial proceedings. By doing so, perverts precious guarantees, frustrates interests society proper function honest purposeful CLARK, logic WHITE'S conclusions extraordinary implications emanate share views untold unfortunate impact today's decision fair ustice. misunderstood said. 43 WHITE, whom CLARK STEWART join, 44 date disentitled secure admissions accused. moves 'focus' Although purports limited facts naive new cf. 799; Griffin 351 12, 76 585, 100 891; Douglas 353, 814, 811, Cf. Carnley Cochran, 369 506, 884, 70. least once becomes presumably, arrested, unless waived thus major step direction goal seemingly mind—to bar individual involuntarily put 'ahead' English judges good sense leave matter discretionary court.* reject invitation farther issued. 45 abandoning voluntary-involuntary test confessions, driven notion uncivilized accused's attempts nebulous attaching guaranteed binding virtue Amendment. entitles counsel's preparing stands impenetrable barrier suspect. From moment attaches, wholly unworkable impossible administer cars equiped public defenders undercover informants defense side. abandon cases defining analysis requiring presence substitute amorphous principle required whenever helpful. 114; d 193; These dealt requirement definable won stages probative approach argue potential before, after, commits crucial within reach would-be Until simply free 46 assume provision meant amend supersede self-incrimination Fifth Amendment, States. Malloy Hogan, 1489. amendment addresses resolves proscribing compelled statements. Neither Framers, language, century nor Professor provides iota support idea answer compulsion—the incriminate disclosures. 47 Today's squared provisions which, view, define empowered administer. Fourth probable cause searches possessions fruits search authorize, require, inquisitorial shielded incrimination. Mulloney F.2d 566, 578, (C.A.1st Cir.); Benjamin, 120 521, 522 (C.A.2d Scully, 225 113, 115 Gilboy, 160 442 (D.C.M.D.Pa.). witness, interrogated answers, And thought safeguards persons offense. Furthermore, now, fingerprinted line-up courtroom itself. 48 chooses ignore matters virtues morality 'confession.' found Constitution. appropriate legislature provide consulted investigation; wants to, questions; bystander, ordeal responding orderly noncompulsory requires. 'inquisitions' forbids were. 49 judges' rule, applied courts, perhaps necessary safeguard possibility confessions. To reflects deep-seated distrust everywhere, unsupported relevant data current material based experience. Obviously mistakes exceed authority, do, ave somewhat faith evidently ability desire prosecutors appellate courts discern correct violations law. 50 concerned narrower matter: unknowing responds mistakenly believes worry hardly calls broadside fired. failure inform disclosures compelled. Cases say least, premium ignorance know better, doubtful characteristically properly looks closely circumstances. Ward Texas, 316 547, 62 1139, 86 1663; Haley Ohio, 332 596, 68 302, 92 224; Payne Arkansas, 356 560, 844, 975. continue But, full answer. 51 suggest destroyed today. peace order too insistent that. crippled task great deal difficult, opinion, unsound, unstated reasons, ambiguous gesture 'could anything,' 'took ( is) (the him) 'wanted talk' statute effect pertinent that: 'All having restrained liberty alleged whatever, shall, except imminent danger escape, practicing Ill.Rev.Stat. (1959), c. 38, § 477. Repealed Jan. 1964, Act approved Aug. 14, H.B. 851. judge justified handcuffing ground 'is ordinary procedure.' 515, 1344, 513 (decided here), 'Our conclusion foreclosed, contends, different issue. settled adjudication resting Due Process Clause violated coerced see, e.g., Ashcraft Tennessee, 322 143, 147—148, 64 921, 923, 88 1192; responsibility examination record,' 316, 1203.' testimo y discussed event could, false accusation bullets. Judges' Rules recognize functional rather special significance attached Rule permit extremely situations 'has prosecuted.' (1964) Crim.L.Rev. 166—170 (emphasis supplied). rules automatically excluded may, discretion, exclude 'Recent tightening (and almost) inevitably, stimulate tendency.' 182. Canon Bar Association's Canons Professional Ethics 'A communicate controversy party counsel; much undertake negotiate compromise him, incumbent particularly avoid everything tend mislead law.' Broeder, Wong Sun States: Study Faith Hope, Neb.L.Rev. 483, 599 604. Twenty-two including hold. Soviet code Trial aptly investigation.' Feifer, Moscow (1964), 86. Barrett, Practices Law—From Arrest Release Charge, Cal.L.Rev. 11, (1962). Committee Print, Subcommittee Investigate Administration Internal Security Act, Senate Judiciary, 85th Cong., 1st Sess., reporting analyzing XXth Congress Communist Party 25, 1956, exposing Stalin purge 1930's. Miller 320 767, 772—773 (opinion Bazelon); Lifton, Thought Reform Psychology Totalism (1961); Rogge, Why Men Confess (1959); Schein, Coercive Persuasion (1961). Stephen, History Law, 312; Report Recommendations Commissioners' Arrests Investigation, District Columbia Attorney General's Poverty (1963), 10—11: survival values advances constant, searching, creative assertions process. Persons (denied counsel) incapable providing challenges indispensable satisfactory operation loss individuals, occasioned failures, apparent. clear situation contest serious tools offensive equity. Beyond considerations, (this detrimental functioning vitality system, occasioned, significantly endangers community.' intelligently knowingly waive either Johnson Zerbst, 304 458, 58 1019, 1461. knowing intelligent waiver occurred case. weakened 1199 (as last-cited recognized). 'In prosecutions, shall enjoy Counsel defence.' reported enforcing rules, practice custody. traditional 'fairness' criminals, quite possibly lost existence, maintained words disregarded fact. reader expecting vigorous denunciation judges, return interpreted 1930. considered, workable machinery justice. Perhaps truth abandoned, tacit consent, unreasonable restriction activities bringing criminals book.' Williams, Questioning Police: Some Practical Considerations, (1960) 325, 331—332. 161—182.

Category: 0